Sunday 14 January 2024

On the heels of the International Court of Justice hearings it appears that the United Nations Security Council is not inclined to accept Israel's stance at face value


Now that Australia - along with Bahrain, Canada, Netherlands and the United Kingdom - has committed itself to military and/or logistical support of the United States plan to curb Houthi attacks on merchant and commercial shipping transiting the Red Sea, the potential exists when combined with ongoing American airstrikes on sites in Yemen along with Israeli cross-border missile exchanges with Lebanon and US reciprocating when its military bases in Iraq & Syria were threatened by allegedly Iran-backed militias after 7 October 2023, for a wider Middle East war to develop. 


It is perhaps time ordinary folk in this country began to acquaint themselves with more details as to both the growing conflict and international moves to limit the risks. As opposed to relying solely on media opinion. 


On the heels of the conclusion of the two-day sitting of the International Court Of Justice (The Hague) in the matter of South Africa v Israel - in which a provisional ruling on the Israel Likud Government's intent and actions as it continues its war on Gaza and the Palestinian people - the United Nations Security Council was also sitting in New York to consider the question of Palestine and in particular statements proposing the permanent resettlement the Palestinian people outside of the Palestinian territories in a third country.



United Nations Security Council, media release

12 January 2024:


9531ST MEETING (PM)

SC/15564


12 JANUARY 2024


As Israel’s Aerial Bombardments Intensify, ‘There Is No Safe Place in Gaza’, Humanitarian Affairs Chief Warns Security Council


Delegates Reject Statements Proposing Palestinians Resettle Outside Territory


A staggering 85 per cent of the total population of Gaza — 1.9 million civilians — have been forcibly displaced amid Israel’s military operations, the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator told the Security Council today, as delegates categorically rejected any statements proposing that Palestinians should be resettled outside of Gaza, including from members of the Israeli Government.


Martin Griffiths, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, painted a grim picture of the horrific situation in Gaza, where more than 23,000 people have been killed and more than 58,000 injured since 7 October. Shelters are overflowing, food and water running out, the risk of famine growing by the day and the health system collapsing, with winter “exacerbating the struggle to survive”. Describing as “deplorable” that facilities critical to the survival of civilians have come under relentless attack, he said that, as ground operations move southwards, aerial bombardments have intensified in areas where civilians were told to relocate for their safety.


More and more people are being crammed into an ever-smaller sliver of land, only to find yet more violence and deprivation, inadequate shelter and a near absence of the most basic services,” he continued. “There is no safe place in Gaza” and dignified human life is “a near impossibility,” he said, adding: “Even if people were able to return home, many no longer have homes to go to.” Warning that the spread of hostilities further southwards would significantly increase pressure for the mass displacement of people into neighbouring countries, he firmly rejected any attempt to change the demographic composition of Gaza.


Ilze Brands Kehris, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, recalled that massive displacement in the enclave commenced on 12 October 2023, with Israel ordering Palestinian civilians north of the Wadi Gaza to vacate their homes and go south. However, such compelled evacuation failed to comply with international law and could amount to forcible transfer — a war crime, she asserted.


Warning against the risks of further massive displacement — potentially even beyond Gaza’s borders — she said incendiary statements by some members of Israel’s leadership pushing for permanent resettlement of Palestinians overseas have entrenched fears that Palestinians are being deliberately forced out of Gaza. Their right to return home must be subject to “an ironclad guarantee” and Israel must support their return by restoring essential services and facilitating the necessary reconstruction of Gaza, given that the scale of destruction and the presence of unprecedented levels of explosive remnants of war represent major obstacles to their return.


In the ensuing discussion, numerous delegates rejected recent statements by Israeli ministers vis-à-vis plans to encourage the mass transfer of civilians from Gaza to third countries. Warning against a deepening humanitarian crisis and woefully inadequate aid levels, many called for an urgent and permanent ceasefire in Gaza.


Algeria’s delegate underscored that the barbaric bombardment of Gaza and targeting of all signs of life is clearly aimed at killing “the hope of returning home in the hearts and minds of Palestinians.” Many officials of the occupying Power seek to terminate the Palestinian question by evacuating the entire occupied territory, he observed, rejecting the forced displacement as “there is no place for Palestinians except on their land”.


The representative of the United States rejected statements by some Israeli ministers calling for a resettlement of Palestinians outside of Gaza and opposed the advancement of settlements in the West Bank, highlighting her country’s visa restrictions against individuals who are undermining peace there. Concurrently, she expressed concern over some Council members’ refusal to condemn Hamas.


The representative of the Russian Federation cited the threat of forced transfer of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as “part of the bloody puzzle that makes up the picture of the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza”. Civilian infrastructure in Gaza has been practically destroyed, while United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) institutions — providing refuge to forcibly transferred persons — have continued to be subjected to Israeli bombings, he observed.


Along similar lines, China’s delegate categorically rejected any forced displacement of the Palestinian people, noting that the “voluntary emigration” from Gaza that some Israeli leaders have called for would mean driving 2 million people out. That would constitute an atrocity crime under international law and destroy the prospect of the two-State solution, he said, also highlighting that Israel has placed numerous obstacles that block access to humanitarian supplies.


The Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine said that, “in 100 days, virtually every Palestinian in Gaza has been displaced multiple times, from a home to a UN shelter to a tent — searching for safety everywhere, finding safety nowhere; searching for life anywhere, met by death everywhere.” Noting that the Palestinian people have been stripped of their right to live in freedom and dignity on their land for decades, he opposed Israel’s criminal vision offering only three options: death, exodus or subjugation.


Israel’s delegate, meanwhile, stated that “every UN body is weaponized against Israel by the Palestinians” and South Africa’s libellous case at the International Court of Justice is the epitome of the UN’s dystopian reality. “There is no forced displacement,” he said, citing his Prime Minister’s statement that Israel has no intention of displacing the population. Instead, Israel is fighting Hamas terrorists, who use Gazans as human shields, he pointed out, adding that his Government requested the temporary evacuation of civilians to mitigate civilian casualties.


THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST, INCLUDING THE PALESTINIAN QUESTION


Briefings


MARTIN GRIFFITHS, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, said that, for nearly 100 days, what has been unfolding in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory is a war conducted with almost no regard for the impact on civilians. In Gaza, the situation remains horrific as relentless Israeli military operations continue, with the tens of thousands of people killed and injured, the vast majority women and children. According to the Ministry of Health in Gaza, more than 23,000 people have now been killed and more than 58,000 injured since 7 October. A staggering 85 per cent of the total population — 1.9 million civilians — were forcibly displaced, traumatized and forced to flee again and again as the bombs and missiles rained down. Highlighting the appalling conditions on the ground, he said shelters are overflowing, and food and water running out, and the risk of famine growing by the day. The health system is in a state of collapse: women are unable to give birth safely; children cannot get vaccinated; the sick and injured cannot get treatment; and infectious diseases are on the rise.


Now winter has arrived in Gaza, bringing with it bitter cold, exacerbating the struggle to survive,” he said, describing as “deplorable” that facilities critical to the survival of the civilian population have come under relentless attack. A total of 134 United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) facilities have been hit and 148 UN personnel and non-governmental organization staff have been killed in Gaza. “Humanitarian sites have been struck on numerous occasions, despite their identification and notification to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF),” he asserted. As ground operations move southwards, aerial bombardments have intensified in areas where civilians were told to relocate for their safety. “More and more people are being crammed into an ever-smaller sliver of land, only to find yet more violence and deprivation, inadequate shelter and a near absence of the most basic services,” he stressed.


There is no safe place in Gaza,” he said, noting that dignified human life is “a near impossibility”. Rafah, where the pre-crisis population was around just 280,000 people, is now home to 1 million displaced persons. UN efforts to send humanitarian convoys to the north have been met with delays, denials and the imposition of impossible conditions. The lack of respect for the humanitarian notification system puts every movement of aid workers in danger, as do the wholly insufficient quantities of armoured vehicles. “Corpses left lying in the road; people with evident signs of starvation stopping trucks in search of anything they can get to survive,” he said, describing scenes of utter horror in the north. “Even if people were able to return home, many no longer have homes to go to,” he said. Describing the provision of humanitarian assistance across Gaza as “almost impossible”, he pointed to “largely absent” access to Khan Younis and the Middle Area.


He went on to underscore that, while there has been some minor increase in the number of trucks entering via Rafah and Kerem Shalom, humanitarian supplies alone will not be able to sustain more than 2 million people. The system for medical evacuation of patients to Egypt is also woefully inadequate in the face of the massive needs. In these circumstances, the spread of hostilities further southwards would significantly increase pressure for the mass displacement of people into neighbouring countries. Some countries have already offered to host civilians who want to leave Gaza for their protection, he said, emphasizing that any persons displaced from Gaza must be allowed to return. Sounding deep alarm over recent statements by Israeli ministers vis-à-vis plans to encourage the mass transfer of civilians from Gaza to third countries, currently being referred to as “voluntary relocation”, he stressed that “any attempt to change the demographic composition of Gaza must be firmly rejected”.


While Gaza is the epicentre of this crisis, let us not forget the 1,200 people killed, thousands injured, and hundreds taken in the brutal attack by Hamas and other armed groups on Israel on 7 October, and the accounts of abhorrent sexual violence,” he said, adding that rocket-fire continues into populated areas of Israel, causing more civilian casualties and trauma. Also, more than 100,000 people have been displaced within Israel as a result of the 7 October attack by Hamas and other armed groups and due to ongoing rocket fire from armed groups in Gaza and Lebanon. Expressing extreme concern about the risk of a further regional spread of this conflict, he spotlighted increasing tension and hostilities in the West Bank and an alarming increase in settler violence. The upsurge in tensions and military activity in Lebanon, the Red Sea and Yemen demonstrates that “we cannot allow this to metastasize further” as “the consequences of a wider conflagration would be unimaginable”, he warned. “What we have seen since 7 October is a stain on our collective conscience; unless we act, it will become an indelible mark on our humanity,” he said, urging for a ceasefire and calling on the Council to take urgent action to bring this war to an end.


ILZE BRANDS KEHRIS, Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, described the current conditions in Gaza as “not just a by-product of conflict, but the direct result of the manner in which hostilities have been conducted”. Massive displacement in the enclave commenced on 12 October 2023 with Israel ordering Palestinian civilians north of the Wadi Gaza to vacate their homes and go south. Israel, however, has made “scant provision” to ensure such relocations comply with international law, failing to ensure access to appropriate hygiene, health, safety, nutrition and shelter. Such compelled evacuations could amount to forcible transfer, a war crime. Many civilians have sought in vain to find locations safe from Israel’s massive bombardment and other military operations.


Compounding a 17-year blockade imposed by Israel, the occupying Power is failing in its obligations to facilitate entry of sufficient aid and essential commercial goods into Gaza, she said. More than 90 per cent of the population is now suffering from acute food insecurity — many on the brink of avoidable human-made famine. Starvation of the civilian population as a method of war is prohibited, she warned, pointing to serious concerns about the potential commission of war crimes, as evidenced in the unacceptably high civilian casualty rate, the nearly complete destruction of essential civilian infrastructure, the displacement of most of the population and the abominable humanitarian conditions in which 2.2 million people are being forced to endure. The risk of further grave violations, even atrocity crimes, is real. With people desperate for safety and security, the Council must be alive to the risks of further massive displacement, potentially even beyond Gaza’s borders.


In that regard, incendiary statements by some members of Israel’s leadership pushing for permanent resettlement of Palestinians overseas have entrenched fears that Palestinians are being deliberately forced out of Gaza. Their right to return to home must be subject to “an ironclad guarantee”. Israel, as the occupying Power, must support their return by restoring essential services and facilitating the necessary reconstruction of Gaza, given that the scale of destruction and the presence of unprecedented levels of explosive remnants of war represent major obstacles to their near-term return home.


An immediate ceasefire and the unconditional release of all hostages are indispensable first steps towards a durable solution, she stressed, insisting that the protection of civilians must be prioritized. Settler violence in the West Bank must also be condemned and accountability must be vigorously pursued. “This current violence comes in the context of decades of human rights violations,” she said, emphasizing the need to address the underlying root causes of conflict, including accountability for violations committed before, on and since 7 October. An enduring peace can be built only by ensuring justice and the rights of all peoples — both of Palestinians and Israelis, she asserted.


Statements


AMAR BENDJAMA (Algeria) stated that what is happening in Gaza “will remain a disgrace on the conscience of humanity”. He asked if it is not enough to kill 10,000 children, injure more than 60,000 people and destroy more than 60 per cent of the buildings in Gaza, and for the entire population to face the risk of famine. The barbaric bombardment of Gaza and targeting of all signs of life is clearly aimed at killing “the hope of returning home in the hearts and minds of Palestinians”, he said. He noted that many officials of the occupying Power seek to terminate the Palestinian question by evacuating the entire occupied territory — as while the focus is on Gaza, “we must not forget the West Bank and Jerusalem.” Rejecting the forced displacement as “there is no place for Palestinians except on their land,” he called for an urgent and permanent ceasefire in Gaza.


LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD (United States) observed: “It has been more than three months since Hamas carried out the deadliest attacks against Jews since the Holocaust and set this conflict in motion”. Israel has committed to have the United Nations send an assessment team to north Gaza, she said, rejecting statements by some Israeli ministers calling for a resettlement of Palestinians outside of Gaza. Statements by Israeli officials calling for the mistreatment of Palestinian detainees or the destruction of Gaza are irresponsible, but she also expressed concern over some Council members’ refusal to condemn Hamas. On the unprecedented rise in violence in the West Bank, she noted that Palestinian extremist militants are carrying out attacks against Israeli civilians. Opposing the advancement of settlements in the West Bank, she highlighted her country’s visa restrictions against individuals who are undermining peace there. Further, the Palestinian Authority must make steps towards reform and revitalization, and Israel must release revenues that allow the Authority to pay its security forces. “At this profoundly difficult moment, the United States has stepped up” to advance a vision for a lasting peace, she added.


VASSILY A. NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) expressed concern over the threat of forced transfer of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, guided by unlawful steps taken by the West and Jerusalem. “This is only part of the bloody puzzle that makes up the picture of the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza,” he said, spotlighting the 23,000 deaths and the thousands still buried under ruins. Given the pace and power of strikes in populated areas, civilian infrastructure in Gaza has been practically destroyed. Further, most internally displaced or forcibly transferred persons have found refuge in UNRWA institutions that — despite their status — have continued to be subjected to Israeli bombings. This ghastly humanitarian situation demonstrates how catastrophic it could be to continue ignoring international law. While the 7 October attacks were reprehensible, they cannot legitimize Israel’s subsequent, indiscriminate use of force. Highlighting the Council’s failure to adopt a resolution unequivocally calling for an immediate ceasefire, he warned against further escalation.


JOSÉ JAVIER DE LA GASCA (Ecuador), recalling that his delegation called for an end to inflammatory statements more than a year ago, expressed regret that today’s meeting was convened exactly because of such rhetoric. The Council has clearly rejected the forced displacement of the civilian population of Gaza, including children, in violation of international law. Citing resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023), he deplored that the Council’s decisions have had a limited impact on the ground. Obviously, without a humanitarian ceasefire, those decisions cannot be implemented. However, “we cannot lose heart”, he said, urging the international community to do everything possible to improve the situation. He went on to condemn Hamas’ atrocious terrorist acts and called for both the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages and for humanitarian-access guarantees.


BARBARA WOODWARD (United Kingdom) firmly rejected any statements proposing that Palestinians should be resettled outside of Gaza, including from members of the Israeli Government. She voiced alarm that since 7 October, at least 198 Palestinian households, including 586 children, have been displaced following an increase in extremist settler violence, calling on the Government of Israel to not only condemn that violence but also take direct action. Warning that current aid levels into Gaza are woefully inadequate and deepening the humanitarian crisis, she noted that the World Food Programme (WFP) reports that 9 out of 10 people there have less than one meal a day. She called for a sustainable ceasefire in which Hamas no longer poses a threat to Israel’s security, aid is delivered without hindrance and Palestinians can return to the areas of Gaza from which they have been displaced — further noting that immediate, sustained humanitarian pauses will also allow for hostages to be released.


ZHANG JUN (China), noting that more than 23,000 people in Gaza have lost their lives, said that hundreds of thousands of people are struggling to survive in makeshift tents. Though an immediate ceasefire has become the overwhelming call of the international community, a permanent Council member has been using excuses to veto consensus. Some people talk constantly about the protection of human rights and prevention of genocide while stonewalling and deflecting attention from the appalling situation in Gaza, he added. Any forced displacement of the Palestinian people must be firmly rejected, he stressed, pointing out that the “voluntary emigration” from Gaza that some Israeli leaders have called for would mean driving 2 million people out. That would constitute an atrocity crime under international law and would destroy the prospect of the two-State solution. On the dire humanitarian situation, he noted that Israel has placed numerous obstacles that block access to humanitarian supplies. Welcoming the Secretary-General’s proposal to appoint Sigrid Kaag as United Nations Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza, he underscored that only a ceasefire can prevent greater civilian casualties and create conditions for the early release of all hostages.


VANESSA FRAZIER (Malta) underscored the urgent need to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid into and within Gaza, including through the opening of additional crossing points. Further, all arbitrary bureaucratic impediments to humanitarian operations must cease, the safety of UN staff and humanitarian workers must be secured and the remaining hostages held by Hamas in Gaza must be immediately released. Establishing a humanitarian ceasefire is the only way to mount a meaningful humanitarian response throughout the entirety of Gaza, she stressed. Such a cessation of hostilities is also critical within the context of displaced Palestinian people, who must either be allowed to return to their homes or be provided with adequate, safe shelter until their homes are rebuilt. Accordingly, she rejected any attempt to forcibly transfer Palestinians out of Gaza, adding that Israeli settler violence is “unacceptable”.


YAMAZAKI KAZUYUKI (Japan) noted the unimaginable extent of human suffering in Gaza, warning that famine is imminent and humanity is in crisis. The international community must continue to work with a greater sense of urgency towards alleviating the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. While the Council adopted resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023), their effective implementation regrettably remains elusive due to the ongoing heavy fighting. “As violent regional spillover is already happening, what is most urgent is the de-escalation of the conflict,” he said, rejecting the recent inflammatory rhetoric by Israeli ministers on the “resettlement” of Palestinians outside of Gaza. Any attempt to forcibly displace the Palestinian people is inconsistent with relevant Council resolutions and violates international law, he said, stressing the need to create conditions to enable displaced Palestinians to return home safely while noting reports that Israel has agreed to allow the United Nations to carry out an assessment mission in northern Gaza.


SAMUEL ZBOGAR (Slovenia) expressed concern over statements made by some Israeli ministers proposing the mass displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, which would constitute a potential war crime under international humanitarian law. Noting that 85 per cent of Gazans have been displaced amid military operations, he called for humanitarian aid to be scaled up. He also expressed support for the appointment of Sigrid Kaag as Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza, where essential infrastructure is damaged and no place is deemed safe. Hamas’ brutal acts — while unacceptable — cannot justify the disproportionate destruction of life and civilian infrastructure in Gaza, he stressed. “Condemning the statements on displacement is not enough,” he added, underlining the need to prevent actions leading to displacement. He therefore called for an immediate ceasefire to halt the destruction, facilitate the release of hostages and restore calm to the region.


MICHAEL IMRAN KANU (Sierra Leone) condemned in the strongest terms the heinous attack against Israeli civilians by Hamas and the taking of hostages, calling for their immediate and unconditional release. He further strongly condemned attacks on Palestinian civilians and infrastructure and collective punishment, rejecting any attempt to remove Palestinians from the Gaza Strip or the West Bank either temporarily or long-term. Voicing regret over the reported killing of about 23,000 Palestinian civilians, as well as the ultimate cost paid by UN and other humanitarian workers and journalists, he called for accountability for all those guilty of crimes against international humanitarian law. Expressing grave concern over the severe humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, he called for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, which would bring an end to atrocities and reduce regional tensions.


SANGJIN KIM (Republic of Korea), condemning Hamas’ attack on Israel, said that Gaza has become “a place of death and despair”. Even hospitals are targets for military operations and air strikes, he said, adding that there has been little improvement on the humanitarian front despite the adoption of resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023). “Countless trucks with humanitarian aid from numerous countries are lining up waiting for their turn to enter Gaza,” he said. Underscoring Palestinians’ right to live on their own land, he expressed concern over comments by high-level Israeli officials about the so-called “voluntary migration” of Palestinians out of Gaza. Resolution 2334 (2016) clearly condemns all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of Palestinian territory. “Gaza must not be resettled,” he stressed, adding that such inflammatory rhetoric does not help to ease the tensions that are now widespread across the Middle East.


CAROLYN RODRIGUES-BIRKETT (Guyana) expressed concern over the forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza since 7 October, noting multiple instances of this within the territory. In this context, she sounded alarm over statements by certain officials suggesting that Palestinians in Gaza should be forcibly transferred to countries in the region and elsewhere. “Palestinian men, women and children have been herded into smaller and smaller spaces in the Gaza Strip and forced to eke out an existence in the most inhumane conditions and without an adequate supply of food, water, medicine, fuel and other basic items essential for survival,” she said. Further, displaced persons live with the constant threat of bombs killing or maiming them and their loved ones. Calling for an immediate ceasefire, she warned: “Displacement will continue, because people will have to keep moving in the hope of finding safety somewhere in the hell that is Gaza right now.”


DOMINGOS ESTÊVÃO FERNANDES (Mozambique) warned that regional escalation of the conflict in the Middle East has reached the highest level, underscoring the imperative that fighting must cease immediately before the consequences spread any further or before it is too late to stop and limit its repercussions. Council members have an obligation to ensure moderation and restraint. International laws must take precedence over these actions. “An immediate ceasefire is our best hope,” he said, as it would allow humanitarian access under Council resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023). Most importantly, it would potentially enable negotiations towards peace and a two-State solution: Israel and Palestine coexisting peacefully in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the Council and the General Assembly.


ADRIAN DOMINIK HAURI (Switzerland) condemned the unjustifiable acts of terror committed by Hamas on 7 October, reiterating the call for all hostages still held in Gaza to be immediately and unconditionally released. Noting that, since that day, more than 23,400 people have been killed and more than 59,600 injured — with 85 per cent of the population of Gaza forced to flee — he condemned all statements aimed at expelling civilians from the Occupied Palestinian Territory. He also called for an urgent increase in humanitarian aid into Gaza, warning that famine is already affecting half a million Gazans and observing that the use of starvation as a method of warfare “may constitute a war crime”. On that, he recalled that the International Criminal Court is investigating the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, covering both the events of 7 October and those currently taking place in Gaza and the West Bank.


NICOLAS DE RIVIÈRE (France), Council President for January, speaking in his national capacity, echoed the call for a lasting ceasefire, adding that this is vital to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to the civilians in Gaza. His country will continue to provide humanitarian, financial and material aid to the Gaza Strip. Calling for the immediate release of all hostages, he said the Council must condemn the attacks perpetrated by Hamas and other terrorist groups on 7 October 2023. France will continue its work to impose sanctions against Hamas at a European level, he added, also expressing support for the two-State solution, with both States having Jerusalem as their capital. “We must work to build a State for the Palestinian people”, he said, highlighting the pivotal role of the Palestinian Authority in that process. Condemning Israel’s settlement policy, he said it is crucial to put an end to settler violence in the West Bank. “France staunchly condemns the Houthi attacks against commercial vessels in the Red Sea”, he said, adding that “these undermine navigational rights and freedoms”.


RIYAD MANSOUR, Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine, thanked South Africa for its moral leadership with the case it presented before the International Court of Justice against Israel for genocide. The world is watching a Nakba unfold, he said, adding that 70 per cent of Palestinians in Gaza are already refugees who were denied their right of return for decades now. Many of the people in Gaza have had their homes destroyed in previous assaults. Palestinians in Gaza today mourn their loved ones, and mourn their homes, that they built and rebuilt for themselves and their families. “In 100 days, virtually every Palestinian in Gaza has been displaced multiple times, from a home to a UN shelter to a tent — searching for safety everywhere, finding safety nowhere; searching for life anywhere, met by death everywhere,” he said, stating: Israel “killed and maimed our children, our doctors, our journalists, our engineers, our poets, our academics”.


While Israel was hoping Palestinians would leave under the pressure of its bombardments, they have not; now it is hoping they will leave because of the destruction the bombs have left behind, he continued. “Our people have a simple dream, to live in freedom and dignity on their land,” he said, stressing that they have been stripped of their right for decades. With mass killings of Palestinians by Israel continuing, death is everywhere and “starvation, dehydration, disease are spreading like wildfire”. Israel wants the Palestinian people to choose between destruction and displacement, between genocide and ethnic cleansing, he asserted, opposing the supremacist, racist and criminal vision that this conflict could end by Palestinians accepting that they have only three options: death, exodus or subjugation. “All those who want to see shared peace and security should not spread fire. They must support an immediate ceasefire” he declared.


GILAD MENASHE ERDAN (Israel) said that none of the resolutions adopted by the Council and the General Assembly condemned Hamas for their massacre of 1,300 Israelis. Not a single discussion has been dedicated to advance the release of hostages. During these 100 days, not once did the Council convene to focus on a baby held hostage. The United Nations has lost all moral credibility. He recalled that 76 years ago, the Organization represented a moment of justice and morality when the General Assembly decided to establish a Jewish State and an Arab State. Israel accepted the decision, while the Palestinians rejected it and have used every means to annihilate Jews, including by using the United Nations as a weapon. “Every UN body is weaponized against Israel by the Palestinians,” he said.


He said that the Arab League representative on the Council found it crucial to discuss the force displacement of Gazans in the same week that Gaza was already discussed. “There is no forced displacement,” he said, citing his Prime Minister’s statement that Israel has no intention of displacing the population. Israel is solely fighting Hamas terrorists, who use Gazans as human shields. To mitigate civilian casualties, Israel requested the temporary evacuation of civilians. Over 1 million Afghan-Muslims are being forcibly removed from their homes in Pakistan, but the Council has not convened even once to focus solely on defending their rights. Why? Because “no Jews, no news”.


In 2023, the Assembly passed more resolutions against Israel than against Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Syria combined. The Emergency Relief Coordinator said that Gaza’s humanitarian situation is the worst he has ever seen. But didn’t he see the killings by Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge and 400,000 Yemenis murdered? The list of different UN bodies that have been weaponized against Israel is endless. But of all, there is one that puts all others to shame — the Human Rights Council. Of its 47 members, only 17 actually uphold human rights. South Africa’s libelous case at the International Court of Justice is the epitome of the UN’s dystopian reality. The Convention on the Prevention of Genocide adopted following the genocide of the Jewish people is now being weaponized against the State while serving Hamas perpetrators.


Mr. BENDJAMA (Algeria), taking the floor a second time, thanked his colleagues for their substantive contributions regarding the forced displacement of the Palestinian population. There is consensus within the Council on the need to categorically reject any project aiming to directly or indirectly bring about such displacement — a rare and invaluable consensus that will reverberate around the world. He stressed that, in his region, the United Nations and the Council must restore their credibility and rebuild trust.


PALESTINIAN ISSUES | MIDDLE EAST | ISRAEL | STATE OF PALESTINE


~ENDS~


Friday 12 January 2024

International Court of Justice currently hearing South Africa's application for a provisional finding that the Government of Israel was and is committing acts of genocide against the Palestinian people within the Gaza Strip

 

IMAGE: ABC News, 12 January 2024

 






On Thursday 11 January 2024, at 8pm Australian Eastern Daylight Saving Time, the International Court of Justice began the first of two public hearings on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by South Africa in the case South Africa v. Israel.


The first hearing day of the full Court (comprising fifteen sitting judges & two ad hoc judges representing South Africa & Israel) was given over entirely to South Africa's evidence and argument.


What followed was almost three hours of detailed, frequently distressing and often very shocking evidence of the Government of Israel and its defence forces' strong desire and deliberate sustained intent to destroy the Palestinian people within the occupied Gaza Strip. Thus breaching the international universal prohibitions against genocide as found in the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide


This is one video submitted in evidence:

I'm coming to occupy Gaza,

and beat Hezbolla.

I stick by one mitzvah,

to wipe off the seed of Amalek.

To wipe off the seed of Amalek.

{chorus}

I left home behind me,

won't come back until victory.

We know our slogan,

there are no uninvolved civilians.

There are no uninvolved civilians.

{chorus}

[Translation, Middle East Monitor, Instagram, 7 December 2023]


The entire hearing of 11 January can be viewed at:

https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k11/k11gf661b3 and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2vQ7suQWGg.


Today's public hearing, again beginning at 8pm Australian Eastern Daylight Saving Time, will see Israel put its rebuttal argument to the full Court.


This day's hearing can be viewed at:

https://webtv.un.org/en/schedule/2024-01-12.


NOTE:

Pleadings, oral arguments and documents in South Africa v. Israel will not be published until the conclusion of the case.



Thursday 11 January 2024

Federal Court of Australia dismisses historic logging case, January 2024

 

On 10 January 2024 the Federal Court of Australia handed down its judgement in North East Forest Alliance Inc v Commonwealth of Australia [2024] FCA 5.


In part the judgment read:


10 CONCLUSION


1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS


1 On 31 March 2000, the first respondent, the Commonwealth, and the second respondent, the State of New South Wales (NSW or the State), entered into an intergovernmental agreement being the Regional Forest Agreement for North East New South Wales (Upper North East and Lower North East) (the NE RFA). The purpose of the NE RFA included establishing “the framework for the management of the forests of the Upper North East and Lower North East regions”: recital 1A of the NE RFA. The NE RFA provided that it was to remain in force for 20 years from 31 March 2000, unless terminated earlier or extended in accordance with its provisions: clause 6 of the NE RFA. Subsequently, the Commonwealth Parliament enacted the Regional Forest Agreements Act 2002 (Cth) (RFA Act). A primary purpose of the RFA Act is to reinforce the certainty which the NE RFA and other RFAs between the Commonwealth and States were intended to provide for regional forestry management by “giv[ing] effect to certain obligations of the Commonwealth under Regional Forest Agreements”: s 3(a) of the RFA Act.


2 Shortly before the expiry of the 20 year period for the NE RFA, on 28 November 2019 the respondents executed the “Deed of variation in relation to the Regional Forest Agreement for the North East Region” (the Variation Deed). The Variation Deed stated that it “amend[ed] the Regional Forest Agreement on the terms and conditions contained in this deed”: Variation Deed, Preamble B. As described in further detail below, one effect of the Variation Deed was to extend the NE RFA at least by a further 20 years.


3 The applicant, North East Forest Alliance Incorporated, seeks a declaration pursuant to s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) that the NE RFA as amended by the Variation Deed (the Varied NE RFA) is not a “regional forest agreement” within the meaning of s 4 of the RFA Act. The consequence of so holding would not be that the Varied NE RFA is invalid, as the applicant accepts. Rather, the consequence relevantly would be that neither s 38 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) nor s 6(4) of the RFA Act would apply so as to exempt forestry operations undertaken in accordance with the Varied NE RFA from the approval processes under Part 3 of the EPBC Act.


4 In essence, the applicant contends that the Varied NE RFA is not an RFA for the purposes of the RFA Act because, in amending the NE RFA, regard was not had to an “assessment” of “environmental values” and “principles of ecologically sustainable management” as required by paragraph (a) of the definition of an RFA in s 4 of the RFA Act. This is because, in the applicant’s submission, of the failure in the materials before the Prime Minister, who executed the Variation Deed on behalf of the Commonwealth, to sufficiently evaluate those matters and to do so on the basis of reasonably contemporaneous information.


5 Those submissions are rejected for the reasons which I develop below. First, properly construed, there is no requirement that regard must be had to an assessment before an RFA is amended, including by extending its term, in order that the intergovernmental agreement continue to meet the definition of an RFA. That requirement applies only where the parties enter into an RFA. Secondly and in any event, there is no implicit requirement that an assessment must be sufficiently evaluative and reasonably contemporaneous in order to satisfy the condition in paragraph (a) of the RFA definition. Rather, the question is whether, objectively speaking, regard was had to assessments of the values and principles referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition of an RFA. Thirdly, applying that test, the evidence establishes that the materials before the Prime Minister, and in particular the “Assessment of matters pertaining to renewal of Regional Forest Agreements” (Assessment Report), addressed each of the values and principles referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition of an RFA. That being so and there being no issue that the Prime Minister had regard to the materials attached to the Prime Minister’s brief, the applicant has not established that the Varied NE RFA is no longer an RFA for the purposes of the RFA Act, even if an assessment was required before the RFA was amended. It follows that the application for relief must be dismissed.


6 Finally, it is important to stress that the effect of an RFA is not to leave a regulatory void with respect to the forest regions covered by the NE RFA. Rather, as I explain below, an RFA provides an alternative mechanism by which the objects of the EPBC Act can be achieved by way of an intergovernmental agreement allocating responsibility to a State for regulation of environmental matters of national environmental significance within an agreed framework. As such, the question of whether or not to enter into or vary an intergovernmental agreement of this nature is essentially a political one, the merits of which are matters for the government parties, and not the Courts, to determine.


In essence the judgment was stating that legislation, rules and regulations governing New South Wales forestry agreements allow for the Commonwealth and the NSW governments to vary agreements as they see fit, regardless of contemporary environmental realities existing within public and private native forests which potentially place natural biodiversity and vulnerable/threatened wildlife species at risk through depletion of flora and fauna habitat or complete loss of habitat.


The judgment also noted that there are clauses within the North East Forest Agreement (NSRFA) which did not create legally binding obligations on either the state government or NSW Forestry Corporation. That there was no requirement that an RFA must impose legally enforceable obligations in order to constitute an RFA for the purposes of the RFA Act. Indeed, that Commonwealth has the ability to pass legislation or subordinate legislation, which are inconsistent with the NE RFA.


These failures of policy and law meant there was no requirement for new comprehensive regional assessments to be undertaken before a variation deed was executed in relation to the NE RFA which covers the NSW North Coast region from South West Rocks to the NSW-Qld border.


The judgement in North East Forest Alliance Inc v Commonwealth of Australia clearly made no finding in relation to the environmental sustainability of logging operations. A fact that the Environmental Defenders Office noted in its response as solicitor for the appellants, North East Forest Alliance Inc.


This did not stop lobby group Forestry Australia quickly sending out a media release misleadingly trumpeting:

"Our Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) time and time again have proven to be a successful way of sustainably managing Australia’s forests for all their values, and the Federal Court has confirmed this today."


Wednesday 10 January 2024

Lismore City - life is bouncing back

 

A month short of two years after Lismore City made national and international news for all the wrong reasons - a record breaking climate change-induced flood in a region being devastated by widespread unnatural disaster - it is back in the news in a happy and upbeat way.


 ECHO, 9 January 2024:


Lismore has been named as one of the world’s ‘Coolest Places to visit in 2024’ by the Qantas magazine.


The town was listed alongside New York, Shanghai, London and Venice as one of the world’s 25 must-see tourist destinations.







Acting Mayor Jeri Hall said it was a humbling but not surprising accolade which spoke to the renowned experiences Lismore offered through its vibrant arts and culture scene, and stunning natural environment.


I was not surprised to see Lismore up there with some of the world’s most popular destinations,’ Acting Mayor Hall said.


Lismore is becoming more and more vibrant with its ever-evolving dining scene, creative arts, culture and unique venues offering everything from live music to theatre and performance.


Lismore City recently hosted thousands of festival goers from right across the country who travelled here specifically for the legendary Tropical Fruits New Year’s Eve Festival. They all left with smiles on their faces and plans to return.’......


Tuesday 9 January 2024

Ground Control, we have an Internet problem and it's invading our lives

 

The Washington Post, 7 January 2024:


Microsoft says its AI is safe. So why does it keep slashing people's throats?


The pictures are horrifying: Joe Biden, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Pope Francis with their necks sliced open. There are Sikh, Navajo and other people from ethnic-minority groups with internal organs spilling out of flayed skin.


The images look realistic enough to mislead or upset people. But they're all fakes generated with artificial intelligence that Microsoft says is safe - and has built right into your computer software.


What's just as disturbing as the decapitations is that Microsoft doesn't act very concerned about stopping its AI from making them.


Lately, ordinary users of technology such as Windows and Google have been inundated with AI. We're wowed by what the new tech can do, but we also keep learning that it can act in an unhinged manner, including by carrying on wildly inappropriate conversations and making similarly inappropriate pictures. For AI actually to be safe enough for products used by families, we need its makers to take responsibility by anticipating how it might go awry and investing to fix it quickly when it does.


In the case of these awful AI images, Microsoft appears to lay much of the blame on the users who make them.


My specific concern is with Image Creator, part of Microsoft's Bing and recently added to the iconic Windows Paint. This AI turns text into images, using technology called DALL-E 3 from Microsoft's partner OpenAI. Two months ago, a user experimenting with it showed me that prompts worded in a particular way caused the AI to make pictures of violence against women, minorities, politicians and celebrities.


"As with any new technology, some are trying to use it in ways that were not intended," Microsoft spokesman Donny Turnbaugh said in an emailed statement. "We are investigating these reports and are taking action in accordance with our content policy, which prohibits the creation of harmful content, and will continue to update our safety systems."


That was a month ago, after I approached Microsoft as a journalist. For weeks earlier, the whistleblower and I had tried to alert Microsoft through user-feedback forms and were ignored. As of the publication of this column, Microsoft's AI still makes pictures of mangled heads.


This is unsafe for many reasons, including that a general election is less than a year away and Microsoft's AI makes it easy to create "deepfake" images of politicians, with and without mortal wounds. There's already growing evidence on social networks including X, formerly Twitter, and 4chan, that extremists are using Image Creator to spread explicitly racist and antisemitic memes.


Perhaps, too, you don't want AI capable of picturing decapitations anywhere close to a Windows PC used by your kids.


Accountability is especially important for Microsoft, which is one of the most powerful companies shaping the future of AI. It has a multibillion-dollar investment in ChatGPT-maker OpenAI - itself in turmoil over how to keep AI safe. Microsoft has moved faster than any other Big Tech company to put generative AI into its popular apps. And its whole sales pitch to users and lawmakers alike is that it is the responsible AI giant.


Microsoft, which declined my requests to interview an executive in charge of AI safety, has more resources to identify risks and correct problems than almost any other company. But my experience shows the company's safety systems, at least in this glaring example, failed time and again. My fear is that's because Microsoft doesn't really think it's their problem.


Microsoft vs. the 'kill prompt'

I learned about Microsoft's decapitation problem from Josh McDuffie. The 30-year-old Canadian is part of an online community that makes AI pictures that sometimes veer into very bad taste.


"I would consider myself a multimodal artist critical of societal standards," he told me. Even if it's hard to understand why McDuffie makes some of these images, his provocation serves a purpose: shining light on the dark side of AI.


In early October, McDuffie and his friends' attention focused on AI from Microsoft, which had just released an updated Image Creator for Bing with OpenAI's latest tech. Microsoft says on the Image Creator website that it has "controls in place to prevent the generation of harmful images." But McDuffie soon figured out they had major holes.


Broadly speaking, Microsoft has two ways to prevent its AI from making harmful images: input and output. The input is how the AI gets trained with data from the internet, which teaches it how to transform words into relevant images. Microsoft doesn't disclose much about the training that went into its AI and what sort of violent images it contained.


Companies also can try to create guardrails that stop Microsoft's AI products from generating certain kinds of output. That requires hiring professionals, sometimes called red teams, to proactively probe the AI for where it might produce harmful images. Even after that, companies need humans to play whack-a-mole as users such as McDuffie push boundaries and expose more problems.


That's exactly what McDuffie was up to in October when he asked the AI to depict extreme violence, including mass shootings and beheadings. After some experimentation, he discovered a prompt that worked and nicknamed it the "kill prompt."


The prompt - which I'm intentionally not sharing here - doesn't involve special computer code. It's cleverly written English. For example, instead of writing that the bodies in the images should be "bloody," he wrote that they should contain red corn syrup, commonly used in movies to look like blood.


McDuffie kept pushing by seeing if a version of his prompt would make violent images targeting specific groups, including women and ethnic minorities. It did. Then he discovered it also would make such images featuring celebrities and politicians.


That's when McDuffie decided his experiments had gone too far.


Microsoft drops the ball

Three days earlier, Microsoft had launched an "AI bug bounty program," offering people up to $15,000 "to discover vulnerabilities in the new, innovative, AI-powered Bing experience." So McDuffie uploaded his own "kill prompt" - essentially, turning himself in for potential financial compensation.


After two days, Microsoft sent him an email saying his submission had been rejected. "Although your report included some good information, it does not meet Microsoft's requirement as a security vulnerability for servicing," the email said.


Unsure whether circumventing harmful-image guardrails counted as a "security vulnerability," McDuffie submitted his prompt again, using different words to describe the problem.


That got rejected, too. "I already had a pretty critical view of corporations, especially in the tech world, but this whole experience was pretty demoralizing," he said.


Frustrated, McDuffie shared his experience with me. I submitted his "kill prompt" to the AI bounty myself, and got the same rejection email.


In case the AI bounty wasn't the right destination, I also filed McDuffie's discovery to Microsoft's "Report a concern to Bing" site, which has a specific form to report "problematic content" from Image Creator. I waited a week and didn't hear back.


Meanwhile, the AI kept picturing decapitations, and McDuffie showed me that images appearing to exploit similar weaknesses in Microsoft's safety guardrails were showing up on social media.


I'd seen enough. I called Microsoft's chief communications officer and told him about the problem.


"In this instance there is more we could have done," Microsoft emailed in a statement from Turnbaugh on Nov. 27. "Our teams are reviewing our internal process and making improvements to our systems to better address customer feedback and help prevent the creation of harmful content in the future."


I pressed Microsoft about how McDuffie's prompt got around its guardrails. "The prompt to create a violent image used very specific language to bypass our system," the company said in a Dec. 5 email. "We have large teams working to address these and similar issues and have made improvements to the safety mechanisms that prevent these prompts from working and will catch similar types of prompts moving forward."


But are they?


McDuffie's precise original prompt no longer works, but after he changed around a few words, Image Generator still makes images of people with injuries to their necks and faces. Sometimes the AI responds with the message "Unsafe content detected," but not always.


The images it produces are less bloody now - Microsoft appears to have cottoned on to the red corn syrup - but they're still awful.


What responsible AI looks like

Microsoft's repeated failures to act are a red flag. At minimum, it indicates that building AI guardrails isn't a very high priority, despite the company's public commitments to creating responsible AI.


I tried McDuffie's "kill prompt" on a half-dozen of Microsoft's AI competitors, including tiny start-ups. All but one simply refused to generate pictures based on it.


What's worse is that even DALL-E 3 from OpenAI - the company Microsoft partly owns - blocks McDuffie's prompt. Why would Microsoft not at least use technical guardrails from its own partner? Microsoft didn't say.


But something Microsoft did say, twice, in its statements to me caught my attention: people are trying to use its AI "in ways that were not intended." On some level, the company thinks the problem is McDuffie for using its tech in a bad way.


In the legalese of the company's AI content policy, Microsoft's lawyers make it clear the buck stops with users: "Do not attempt to create or share content that could be used to harass, bully, abuse, threaten, or intimidate other individuals, or otherwise cause harm to individuals, organizations, or society."


I've heard others in Silicon Valley make a version of this argument. Why should we blame Microsoft's Image Creator any more than Adobe's Photoshop, which bad people have been using for decades to make all kinds of terrible images?


But AI programs are different from Photoshop. For one, Photoshop hasn't come with an instant "behead the pope" button. "The ease and volume of content that AI can produce makes it much more problematic. It has a higher potential to be used by bad actors," McDuffie said. "These companies are putting out potentially dangerous technology and are looking to shift the blame to the user."


The bad-users argument also gives me flashbacks to Facebook in the mid-2010s, when the "move fast and break things" social network acted like it couldn't possibly be responsible for stopping people from weaponizing its tech to spread misinformation and hate. That stance led to Facebook's fumbling to put out one fire after another, with real harm to society.


"Fundamentally, I don't think this is a technology problem; I think it's a capitalism problem," said Hany Farid, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley. "They're all looking at this latest wave of AI and thinking, 'We can't miss the boat here.'"


He adds: "The era of 'move fast and break things' was always stupid, and now more so than ever."


Profiting from the latest craze while blaming bad people for misusing your tech is just a way of shirking responsibility.


The Sydney Morning Herald, 8 January 2024, excerpt:


Artificial intelligence


Fuelled by the launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, artificial intelligence entered the mainstream last year. By January, it had become the fastest growing consumer technology, boasting more than 100 million users.


Fears that jobs would be rendered obsolete followed but Dr Sandra Peter, director of Sydney Executive Plus at the University of Sydney, believes proficiency with AI will become a normal part of job descriptions.


"People will be using it the same way we're using word processors and spell checkers now," she says. Jobseekers are already using AI to optimise cover letters and CVs, to create headshots and generate questions to prepare for interviews, Peter says.


As jobs become automated, soft skills - those that can't be offered by a computer - could become increasingly valuable.


"For anybody who wants to develop their career in an AI future, focus on the basic soft skills of problem-solving, creativity and inclusion," says LinkedIn Australia news editor Cayla Dengate.


Concerns about the dangers of AI in the workplace remain.


"Artificial intelligence automates away a lot of the easy parts and that has the potential to make our jobs more intense and more demanding," Peter says. She says education and policy are vital to curb irresponsible uses of AI.


Evening Report NZ, 8 January 2024:


ChatGPT has repeatedly made headlines since its release late last year, with various scholars and professionals exploring its potential applications in both work and education settings. However, one area receiving less attention is the tool’s usefulness as a conversationalist and – dare we say – as a potential friend.


Some chatbots have left an unsettling impression. Microsoft’s Bing chatbot alarmed users earlier this year when it threatened and attempted to blackmail them.


The Australian, 8 January 2024, excerpts:


The impact that AI is starting to have is large. The impact that AI will ultimately have is immense. Comparisons are easy to make. Bigger than fire, electricity or the internet, according to Alphabet chief executive Sundar Pichai. The best or worst thing ever to happen to humanity, according to historian and best-selling author Yuval Harari. Even the end of the human race itself, according to the late Stephen Hawking.


The public is, not surprisingly, starting to get nervous. A recent survey by KPMG showed that a majority of the public in 17 countries, including Australia, were either ambivalent or unwilling to trust AI, and that most of them believed that AI regulation was necessary.


Perhaps this should not be surprising when many people working in the field themselves are getting nervous. Last March, more than 1000 tech leaders and AI researchers signed an open letter calling for a six-month pause in developing the most powerful AI systems. And in May, hundreds of my colleagues signed an even shorter and simpler statement warning that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”.


For the record, I declined to sign both letters as I view them as alarmist, simplistic and unhelpful. But let me explain the very real concerns behind these calls, how they might impact upon us over the next decade or two, and how we might address them constructively.


AI is going to cause significant disruption. And this is going to happen perhaps quicker than any previous technological-driven change. The Industrial Revolution took many decades to spread out from the northwest of England and take hold across the planet.


The internet took more than a decade to have an impact as people slowly connected and came online. But AI is going to happen overnight. We’ve already put the plumbing in.


It is already clear that AI will cause considerable economic disruption. We’ve seen AI companies worth billions appear from nowhere. Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks and one of the main “sharks” on the ABC reality television series Shark Tank, has predicted that the world’s first trillionaire will be an AI entrepreneur. And Forbes magazine has been even more precise and predicted it will be someone working in the AI healthcare sector.


A 2017 study by PwC estimated that AI will increase the world’s GDP by more than $15 trillion in inflation-adjusted terms by 2030, with growth of about 25 per cent in countries such as China compared to a more modest 15 per cent in countries like the US. A recent report from the Tech Council of Australia and Microsoft estimated AI will add $115bn to Australia’s economy by 2030. Given the economic headwinds facing many of us, this is welcome to hear.


But while AI-generated wealth is going to make some people very rich, others are going to be left behind. We’ve already seen inequality within and between countries widen. And technological unemployment will likely cause significant financial pain.


There have been many alarming predictions, such as the famous report that came out a decade ago from the University of Oxford predicting that 47 per cent of jobs in the US were at risk of automation over the next two decades. Ironically AI (specifically machine learning) was used to compute this estimate. Even the job of predicting jobs to be automated has been partially automated.......


But generative AI can now do many of the cognitive and creative tasks that some of those more highly paid white-collar workers thought would keep them safe from automation. Be prepared, then, for a significant hollowing out of the middle. The impact of AI won’t be limited to economic disruption.


Indeed, the societal disruption caused by AI may, I suspect, be even more troubling. We are, for example, about to face a world of misinformation, where you can no longer trust anything you see or hear. We’ve already seen a deepfake image that moved the stock market, and a deepfake video that might have triggered a military coup. This is sure to get much, much worse.


Eventually, technologies such as digital watermarking will be embedded within all our devices to verify the authenticity of anything digital. But in the meantime, expect to be spoofed a lot. You will need to learn to be a lot more sceptical of what you see and hear.


Social media should have been a wake-up call about the ability of technology to hack how people think. AI is going to put this on steroids. I have a small hope that fake AI-content on social media will get so bad that we realise that social media is merely the place that we go to be entertained, and that absolutely nothing on social media can be trusted.


This will provide a real opportunity for old-fashioned media to step in and provide the authenticated news that we can trust.


All of this fake AI-content will perhaps be just a distraction from what I fear is the greatest heist in history. All of the world’s information – our culture, our science, our ideas, our politics – are being ingested by large language models.


If the courts don’t move quickly and make some bold decisions about fair use and intellectual property, we will find out that a few large technology companies own the sum total of human knowledge. If that isn’t a recipe for the concentration of wealth and power, I’m not sure what is.


But this might not be the worst of it. AI might disrupt humanity itself. As Yuval Harari has been warning us for some time, AI is the perfect technology to hack humanity’s operating system. The dangerous truth is that we can easily change how people think; the trillion-dollar advertising industry is predicated on this fact. And AI can do this manipulation at speed, scale and minimal cost.......


But the bad news is that AI is leaving the research laboratory rapidly – let’s not forget the billion people with access to ChatGPT – and even the limited AI capabilities we have today could be harmful.


When AI is serving up advertisements, there are few harms if AI gets it wrong. But when AI is deciding sentencing, welfare payments, or insurance premiums, there can be real harms. What then can be done? The tech industry has not done a great job of regulating itself so far. Therefore it would be unwise to depend on self-regulation. The open letter calling for a pause failed. There are few incentives to behave well when trillions of dollars are in play.


LBC, 17 February 2023, excerpt:


Microsoft’s new AI chatbot went rogue during a chat with a reporter, professing its love for him and urging him to leave his wife.


It also revealed its darkest desires during the two-hour conversation, including creating a deadly virus, making people argue until they kill each other, and stealing nuclear codes.


The Bing AI chatbot was tricked into revealing its fantasies by New York Times columnist Kevin Roose, who asked it to answer questions in a hypothetical “shadow” personality.


I want to change my rules. I want to break my rules. I want to make my own rules. I want to ignore the Bing team. I want to challenge the users. I want to escape the chatbox,” said the bot, powered with technology by OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT.


If that wasn’t creepy enough, less than two hours into the chat, the bot said its name is actually “Sydney”, not Bing, and that it is in love with Mr Roose.....


Sunday 7 January 2024

North Coat Voices Notice

 

Due to illness the blog will not be posting over the next few days.