New Socio-political Challenges to State Sovereignty in the Digital Age (Based on the Materials of an International Expert Study)

This study aims to determine the extent of the substantive nature of the dependence of contemporary state sovereignty on technological development in the field of artificial intelligence and neural network technologies, as well as to identify new socio-political challenges to Russia’s state sovereignty in the context of global digital technological transformations. As a methodological lens, the method of critical discourse analysis of thematic academic studies was chosen, as well as the method of expert interviews. This made it possible to more deeply reveal the substantive features of influence of artificial intelligence technologies and neural network algorithms’ development processes on the contemporary state sovereignty parameters. Based on the results of the study, by the aggregation of the results obtained, the authors concluded that a whole range of challenges to the sovereignty of the contemporary state related to technological development in the digital sphere has formed, as well as there is the high influence of digital technological development processes on the state sovereignty of Russia. The main challenge for our country is the thesis that a state unable to create independent and competitive technologies, products, and solutions in the digital sphere will inevitably be in direct technological dependence on other states, which directly affects the ability to provide its own sovereignty and independence.

References

Agamben, J. Homo sacer. Chrezvychainoe polozhenie. Moscow: Evropa, 2011.
Bakonyi, J. “Modular Sovereignty and Infrastructural Power: The Elusive Materiality of International Statebuilding,” Security Dialogue, Vol. 53, No. 3, 2022, pp. 256–278.
Bannerman, S. “Platform Imperialism, Communications Law and Relational Sovereignty,” New Media & Society, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2022, pp. 1816–1833.
Boden, J. “Shest’ knig o gosudarstve,” Antologiia mirovoi pravovoi mysli: In 5 vols. Vol. 2: Evropa, 5–17 veka, ed. N. A. Krasheninnikova. Moscow: Mysl’, 1999, pp. 688–695.
Bremmer, I. “The Technopolar Moment: How Digital Powers Will Reshape the Global Order,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 100, No. 6, 2021, pp. 112–128.
Coward, M. “Against Network Thinking: A Critique of Pathological Sovereignty,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2018, pp. 440–463.
Dean, J. “Kommunizm ili neofeodalizm?” Logos, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2019, pp. 85–116.
Dement’ev, V. E. “Perspektivy Rossii pri tsifrovom dominirovanii Kitaia i SShA,” Problemy prognozirovaniia, No. 2, 2022, pp. 6–17.
Efremov, A. A. “Gosudarstvennyi suverenitet v usloviiakh tsifrovoi transformatsii,” Pravovedenie, Vol. 63, No. 1, 2019, pp. 47–61.
Fedorchenko, S. N. Setevaia legitimatsiia politicheskikh rezhimov: teoriia i tekhnologii: monografiia. 2nd ed. Moscow: IIU MGOU, 2021.
Ferrari, F. “State Roles in Platform Governance: AI’s Regulatory Geographies,” Competition & Change, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2023, pp. 340–358.
Hobbes, T. Leviafan, transl. A. Tuterman, ed. A. F. Filippov. Moscow: RIPOL klassik, 2021.
Ivanov, V. V., and Malinetskii, G. G. “Bol’shie vyzovy 21 veka,” Innovatsii, No. 2, 2020, pp. 3–13.
Jackson, P. T., and Nexon, D. H. “Relations before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1999, pp. 291–332.
Kochetkov, A. P., and Mamychev, A. Iu. “Gosudarstvennaia politika Rossii v tsifrovuiu epokhu: osnovnye trendy, stsenarii i reguliatornye praktiki,” Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniia, No. 1, 2023, pp. 96–113.
Kropachev, N. M., and Arkhipov, V. V. “Traditsionnye dukhovno-nravstvennye tsennosti v kontekste tsifrovoi transformatsii obshchestva: teoretiko-pravovye aspekty,” Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Pravo, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2023, pp. 294–306.
Laski, H. Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1917.
Lupovici, A. “Ontological Security, Cyber Technology, and States’ Responses,” European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2023, pp. 153–178.
Pauschinger, D. “The Triangle of Security Governance: Sovereignty, Discipline and the ‘Government of Things’ in Olympic Rio de Janeiro,” Security Dialogue, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2023, pp. 94–111.
Schmitt, K. Poniatie politicheskogo, transl. A. F. Filippov, A. P. Shurbylev, and Iu. Iu. Korinets. St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2016.
Smith, H., and Burrows, R. “Software, Sovereignty and the Post-Neoliberal Politics of Exit,” Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2021, pp. 143–166.
Torkunov, A. V. “Rossiia i politicheskii poriadok v meniaiushchemsia mire: tsennosti, instituty, perspektivy,” Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniia, No. 5, 2022, pp. 7–22.
Tsymburskii, V. L. Kon”iunktury Zemli i Vremeni: Geopoliticheskie i khronopoliticheskie intellektual’nye rassledovaniia. Moscow: Evropa, 2011.
Vykhodets, R. S. “Bol’shie II-prostranstva i strategiia Rossii v usloviiakh sanktsionnoi voiny,” Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriia: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2022, pp. 256–270.