(This article was written by Maria Maalouf and appeared in Arab News. EU's world-first AI law to reverberate in America)

The European Parliament last week passed the Artificial Intelligence Act, which is viewed as the world’s first comprehensive law to define the legal aspects of AI. It provides for EU-wide regulations in reference to quality of data, transparency, human oversight and accountability. The law will apply to the providers and developers of all AI systems that are marketed or used within the EU, regardless of whether they are based inside or outside the bloc. Therefore, it will have implications for the use of AI in the US.

The act will impose fines on any company or group violating its rules. The exact amount will be a percentage of the global annual revenue that AI generates. The European AI law is being defended as not stifling innovation. Quite the opposite, in fact, as small and medium-sized enterprises will be adopting AI techniques. This will enhance innovation.

The European law on AI squares well with the main scope of AI, which is to achieve a competitive advantage in e-commerce. This will be gained in the processes of manufacturing, managing human resources, fostering customer relations and promoting advertisements and marketing. In other words, enterprises’ performance will be raised and this can increase profits, lower costs, save time, better collect data and reduce production and distribution errors, among other advantages.

The political history of the new act began in April 2021. It was the culmination of negotiations between the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament. Agreement on the text was reached in December 2023. Last week’s vote in the European Parliament turned that political consensus into law.

Most of its bylaws will enter into force two years after its introduction. However, any provision that has to do with the application of prohibited AI systems will be enforced within six months of its signing into law. In addition, any of its stipulations in reference to generative AI will be enforced after one year.

The act will abolish several AI applications that are considered to be a threat to the rights of citizens. These are related to biometric categorization systems that originate from sensitive characteristics. This will also deal with the practice of untargeted scraping of facial images by the internet or in CCTV. Such a practice aims to create a facial recognition database. These AI applications will be forbidden, in addition to the techniques that AI employs to control emotion recognition. These methods are considered manipulative of human behavior and exploit humans’ vulnerabilities.

The law is a direct response to the proposals submitted by average European citizens to the Conference on the Future of Europe in 2021-22. Many of their concerns centered on how to boost the European economic advantage in a few strategic economic sectors. They wanted to improve their ability to access information and data regardless of any particular trait or ethnic, political or religious affiliation.

The European AI Office will now be founded. It will function according to the European Commission’s rules. It will not conflict with the AI authorities and government bodies controlling the AI operations of individual member states. It will rather offer guidance on how European countries can best utilize AI and its capabilities. It promises not to discriminate against any European government or organization using this technology. However, political observers will not rule out a potential conflict involving this office and European entities since the implementation of AI involves complex processes and procedures and they can lead to many conflicts of interest among the people employing them.

Two different reactions have emerged regarding the new European AI Act. Human rights groups have condemned it. The Access Now organization issued a statement saying: “The new AI Act is littered with concessions to industry lobbying, exemptions for the most dangerous uses of AI by law enforcement and migration authorities, and prohibitions so full of loopholes that they don’t actually ban some of the most dangerous uses of AI.”

On the other hand, the UN General Assembly is studying many draft texts as it seeks to announce a statement that can be a general declaration of humankind’s use of AI.

Finally, the European AI Act will have a great impact on any company doing business in the EU. Every American company must review its AI systems before they are used in Europe. This reviewing process could be costly and time-consuming. And American businesses cannot rely on US law because there is no federal legislation that allows or bans certain AI policies. The US government and private sector companies have no other option but to abide by the European law.

The only American alternative to this law would be to rely on state laws and regulations governing privacy in the US. But this would be a very short-sighted approach as far as AI laws in America are concerned. Therefore, the Europeans are far ahead of any other nation or group of nations in providing guarantees on how to use AI the right way.

Maria Maalouf is a Senior Media Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington D.C.-based foreign policy and defense think tank.

(This article was written by Hermann Tertsch and appeared in El Debate. Delcy y Zapatero, más allá del amor)

Many of you will not know that last Tuesday a Bolivian woman, the former constitutional president Jeanine Áñez, completed her third year in a Bolivian prison.

In lamentable conditions she is serving an unjust and unjustifiable sentence. All the charges against her are falsehoods, fabrications of a narco-communist regime. Many other patriotic Bolivians met the same fate.

What you will also not know is that one day later the former prime minister of Spain, José Luís Rodríguez Zapatero, arrived in Bolivia.

Anyone who thinks he came to demand the freedom of Áñez and of the hundreds of political prisoners that the regime of Luis Arce already holds in its dictatorial and criminal drift is mistaken.

No, Zapatero came to Bolivia with Delcy Rodríguez, the one of the suitcases that we do not know how many times, in what number, and through how many airports and ports have arrived in Spain in recent years.

Delcy is a criminal drug trafficker banned in Europe, vice-president of the murderer Nicolás Maduro and a very great friend of the Spanish government. What Sánchez, Zapatero, Borrell and the rest of the socialists have with Delcy seems much more important than love.

Also with them was the symbol of narco corruption, the former Colombian president Ernesto Samper, and some other luminaries of the Puebla Group and the São Paulo Forum, the multinational of the symbiosis between the communist movement and organized crime that exploits drug trafficking.

Zapatero and his illustrious company had arrived on a goodwill mission — if that is possible with people of this ilk — a mission of reconciliation or peace among their own. For in Bolivia a war has broken out between the former president Evo Morales and President Luis Arce.

They were friends and Arce was Morales’s minister, but power has these things. Both want to command the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) and both want to control the businesses still held by a country sinking into bankruptcy, into the incompetence of its rulers, and into crime. The businesses are the mines and cocaine. And precious little else.

What matters, of course, is the main weapon for the expansion of the entire totalitarian communist movement in the subcontinent, which is cocaine. That the whole Bolivian people suffer ever more, and that its prisoners live wretchedly and die, is not what worries this gang gathered there.

What worries the Puebla Group is that wars among their own greatly harm business. Bolivia is a key country in the massive expansion of the coca business and drug trafficking.

We do not know whether the two Rodríguezes, Zapatero and Delcy, have succeeded in their mediation work. We also know that Delcy, vice-president of the most murderous and torturing regime in America today, is not moved by political prisoners.

They say Zapatero is not moved either, even though he knows about them, because he has spent a decade now in the service of his friend the murderer Maduro in all kinds of matters that are always profitable but never honorable.

Jeanine Áñez, as interim constitutional president, had handed over power to Luis Arce in an impeccable transition at a ceremony in the presence of King Felipe VI on November 8, 2020.

It took the new president only a few months to arrest his predecessor and many others who had done their duty in the violent crisis of November 2018, after the attempted electoral fraud by the communist and drug trafficker Evo Morales and his subsequent flight in the face of the popular uprising.

If Zapatero’s role is repugnant — not only in his visit to Bolivia this week but throughout his entire existence since 11-M, and of course in his very murky role as a fixer for the worst Spanish-American criminals — one must also describe as contemptible the silence on this anniversary of those responsible at the Organization of American States and the European Union, Luís Almagro and Josep Borrell.

Because it was the OAS and the EU that vouched for Áñez assuming the presidency when those ahead of her in rank refused it. In the past three years we have not once heard Borrell demand the freedom of Áñez and of the Bolivian political prisoners. Lately he seems dedicated only to insulting and defaming Israel, once again taking on that role of defender of the Iranian regime and its puppets in Gaza and Lebanon.

Josep Borrell is another who, like Zapatero, has succumbed to the charms of the São Paulo Forum and has campaigned in favor of all its candidates throughout the shameful years in which he has held the supposed representation of the EU’s foreign policy.

All of them are enemies of freedom, all of them linked to the great cartels of the FARC, the ELN, the Venezuelan government and army, the Mexican cartels that are partners of López Obrador and today the owners of half of Ecuador.

All of them have had the official support of the European Union thanks to Borrell, the Spanish government and the PSOE, utterly devoted to the Puebla Group in all its interests.

With special obscenity in the protection and subsidizing of the Cuban dictatorship with European money.

All these sad and lamentable facts would have at least one positive effect if they led Spaniards to understand the true character of the forces that govern under Sánchez.

And to reflect on the colossal danger of this invasion of Europe, through Spain, by Ibero-American organized crime with its ideological banners — a plan forged in its day by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez, which began twenty years ago and is today a reality.

Because if the Spanish socialists have so very much affinity with the murderers and torturers with whom they sit down, travel and share suitcases, it should not surprise us that one day they will treat Spaniards as they are treating Cubans, Bolivians, Venezuelans or Nicaraguans.

And if someone now comes and says that in Europe that is not possible, I would answer that in the Europe of the 21st century everything is already as possible as in the 20th.

Hermann Tertsch is a Distinguished Fellow (Honorary) at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington D.C.-based foreign policy and defense think tank.

(This article was written by Maria Maalouf and appeared in Arab News. Financial challenges will hamper Trump's election campaign)

Former US President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for November’s presidential election, faces a significant dilemma following civil judgments requiring him to pay more than $440 million. As Trump’s legal bills continue to swell — he is also the defendant in four separate criminal cases — his team is examining the options for paying the fines imposed on him amid questions about whether he will be forced to use other sources of financing, sell assets and real estate or even declare bankruptcy, an option six of his businesses have resorted to in the past.

One of Trump’s criminal cases is taking place in New York, where he is accused of making hush-money payments ahead of the 2016 election. The judge supervising the case has set March 25 as the trial’s start date, despite the objections of Trump’s lawyer, who sought to postpone it due to the former president’s competing legal and political obligations.

In Florida, Trump has been charged over his handling of classified documents upon leaving office, while in Washington and Georgia he is accused over his efforts to overturn his loss in the 2020 election.

Of course, the fines Trump has been hit with threaten the financial liquidity of the former president and billionaire businessman and raise questions about his political future, as well as the fate of his real estate empire.

There are a set of possible options that Trump may resort to when paying the fines, including resorting to the Republican National Committee. His efforts to change its leadership — with the appointment of a new chair to replace Ronna McDaniel and the move of Lara Trump, his son Eric’s wife, to co-chair — are considered by some to be an indication of the possibility of Trump asking the committee to help him pay the fines. However, this would pose a threat to his and the Republican Party’s chances in November’s elections.

If the funds requested in the New York civil fraud case are not paid, the ruling becomes effective immediately and the city can begin seizing Trump’s assets. The judge could order Trump to produce his bank account records or directly seize his proceeds. Even if an appeal is filed against the rulings, it is not common for judges to reduce the fines imposed. Trump also cannot delay paying the fines until after an appeal is heard, as he must place the money in the court’s account. If Trump truly cannot afford these provisions, he should declare bankruptcy.

Forbes magazine estimates the value of Trump’s New York real estate at $690 million. His total wealth is estimated at $2.6 billion, including $870 million-worth of golf clubs and resorts, $190 million in real estate outside of New York City and $640 million in “liquidity and personal assets.” So, there might be a possibility of him paying the fines from cash and personal assets.

One recent report suggested that Trump may resort to selling something, but it does not necessarily have to be real estate, as he could sell some investments or other assets.

He has denied any fraud and denounced the exploitation of the judiciary against a presidential candidate who is ahead in the opinion polls.

It is noteworthy that Trump was given a 30-day implementation period following the ruling on Feb. 16, during which he has to either deposit the fine into the court’s account or obtain a bond. Even if he had $440 million in cash, which is unclear, paying the penalties could wipe out his accounts. Another solution is a GoFundMe campaign that seeks to raise the sum that Trump owes. The campaign has already raised more than $1.3 million. It is being organized by Elena Cardone, a woman from Florida who describes herself as “a mother and an ardent supporter of American values.”

Finally, in comparison to what the Republican Party’s front-runner faces, the Biden campaign and the Democratic National Committee have the advantage of being able to raise money together, which their Republican competitors cannot do at this moment. President Joe Biden, the Democratic Party and their allies started the 2024 election year with a whopping $140 million in cash, including $46 million available to Biden’s presidential campaign and $21 million to the Democratic National Committee, in addition to $24 million from the Biden-aligned political action committee Future Forward.

Maria Maalouf is a Senior Media Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington D.C.-based foreign policy and defense think tank.

India is coming of age – already the world’s most populous nation and democracy, by 2030 at the latest it will become the world’s third largest economy. Prime Minister Modi has set the pace and has become the personal embodiment of India’s success. He leads a self-confident nation, albeit one facing many challenges, and has established his position on the world stage. Modi has shifted India from its old “non-alignment” of the Nehru era to “multi-alignment”. The decades-long links with Russia now include access to oil at discount prices while continuing as a major recipient of Russian defence equipment. But now France has become India’s second largest external defence supplier after Russia, while relations with the United States have steadily improved in the face of the rising challenge of China.

There has now been a complete turnaround in India’s relations with the USA. Previously “due to India’s ideological proclivities as much as strategic calculations” the US was long regarded with suspicion by India. In 2005 Modi, then Chief Minister of Gujarat, was misguidedly refused a visa to the USA. Eighteen years on he was being welcomed to the White House on a state visit, his eighth visit as Prime Minister. US-Indian bilateral trade has increased tenfold since 2000 – from $20 billion to over $200 billion today, making the US India’s biggest individual trading partner.

Four years ago, President Trump and Prime Minister Modi vowed to strengthen a United States-India Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership, reaffirming the pledge to support the transfer to India of advanced U.S. military and civil technology and India’s permanent membership on a reformed UN Security Council. Last October, President Biden reemphasised this commitment, with cooperative ventures in defence manufacturing and a whole range of advanced civil high technologies.

Foreign Minister Jaishankar, who had been India’s ambassador to Washington 2013-15 following his time in Beijing, readily admits that the hard realities of today’s world mean that the US is now seen as a key partner. While India’s multi-alignment and quest for strategic autonomy mean that it will not bind itself as closely as the US may wish there will be ever-closer mutual commitment in the years ahead. The growing political investment in the Quad, the Indo-Pacific quadrilateral security dialogue embracing India, the US, Japan and Australia, is evidence of this new alignment of geo-political outlook.

In this increasingly transactional world, India will want to see what its friends bring to the table, what capabilities they have, and how reliable they will be. Instead of just talking about China, it is time that the West paid far greater attention to India and its growing capabilities. India is potentially the most vital ally of the West as the world becomes more clearly divided between old-fashioned, aggressive autocracies and the liberal democracies that seek peace with freedom and a better world.

(This article was written by Hermann Tertsch and appeared in El Debate. Von der Leyen, notre amour)

The People’s Party in the European Parliament now has its candidate to preside over the European Commission, and it is the current president, Ursula von der Leyen. A Rhineland German, who was a minister under Angela Merkel — first highly controversial in the Ministry of Family, then an uncontroversial catastrophe in the Ministry of Defense — she was a last-minute compromise that Macron and Merkel pulled out of the hat in 2019 after many other failed options.

The People’s Party seems very pleased with the record, because it is putting her forward again. Even though in 2019 she was elected by only 9 votes out of 706, and all thanks to the naive Polish conservatives who believed her promise that at last, with her, the European Commission would respect a right-wing government in Poland. They voted in her favor and against the vote of all their colleagues in the ECR group, among them VOX, and very soon they understood the terrible mistake of having believed this German woman who called herself non-sectarian and open to all ideas and contributions.

The truth is that, in payment for that candid vote in favor, Von der Leyen has been the instigator of a policy of harassment, defamation, disinformation and economic blockade against the conservative government of Poland, until she managed, with Germany’s help, to bring it down. Today Poland is governed by the so-called Civic Platform (OP) of Donald Tusk in alliance with socialists and communists. Yes, Von der Leyen has achieved that historic feat of getting the communists to govern in Poland again. Mind you, in alliance with the partners of the PP and the PSOE.

The seizure of government by Donald Tusk — like Alberto Núñez Feijóo, a man from Von der Leyen’s ranks — has taken place with uproar, the storming of the media, the detention and intimidation of opponents, and the worst disinformation campaign there has been in Poland since General Wojciech Jaruselski left. But Von der Leyen has now gone to Poland and none of the brutal abuses of Tusk’s new government against the new opposition has troubled her. And she has announced to the head of government and his socialist and communist partners that she will shower them with goods, with billions of euros — all that money she had irregularly blocked from the previous government in order to mobilize the electorate against it.

Von der Leyen deceived the Poles, was elected by nine votes and suddenly became the replica of a Greta Thunberg advanced in years, with incendiary speeches against denialism and the far right. The far right being, for her, the conservatives, among them the Poles who had given her their vote in exchange for promises of pluralism and respect. Denialism includes all those who oppose the social engineering inspired by the radical environmentalism and climate hysteria of the Greens and by the interventionism and bureaucratic centralism of the socialists. Who triumph thanks to that unconditional adherence of the European People’s Party under the command of Mrs. Von der Leyen.

Von der Leyen has been the mother of the Green Deal, the implacable guardian of the drift toward a centralist state in which there is ever less subsidiarity and ever more mass controls from Brussels through a web of regulations, laws and directives that make life agonizingly difficult for some sectors of the population and absolutely impossible for others. The social-democratic, environmentalist and woke arrogance of this supposed German Christian Democrat has created the greatest disaffection ever felt toward the European Union. And today even her own party, which has spent all five years of the legislature without protesting the terrible direction policy had taken against agriculture, livestock farming, the agri-food industry, industry in general, research, energy and transport, and all the sectors affected by this regulatory frenzy.

Von der Leyen is not to blame for the fact that the People’s Party and the Socialists vote practically the same, always, in the European Parliament. In as much as 89% of the votes in this legislature, even if now, before the elections, the People’s Party is beginning to find fault with the automatic following of socialists, liberals and greens. Von der Leyen is indeed to blame for having led the Commission and that majority toward a centralist, interventionist and eco-climatic-hysterical ideological radicalism that does infinite harm to the nations.

In Von der Leyen’s favor, it must be said that her radicalism and despotism have done much to open the eyes of ever broader sectors of European societies. And her selection as the European leader of the various nations’ people’s parties, including the Spanish PP, makes it very clear that her intention is to continue with the policy that is causing endless disasters in Europe. The electoral forecasts suggest that Europeans have noticed. The only groups rising in the polls are the two to the right of the PP, which are the ECR with Vox and the Polish conservatives of PiS and Meloni’s Fratelli d’Italia on one side, and the ID with Le Pen’s French, the Lega and the AfD on the other. All the rest, including the PP of Von der Leyen and Feijóo, are falling.

That being so, many movements can be expected on the European right, which for the first time can form a majority leaving out socialists, liberals, greens and communists. What is clear is that the PP is heading toward a rupture between those in its ranks who still have something conservative about them and those who are openly social-democratic. And it is clear that Von der Leyen will not count on the votes of the Polish conservatives this time.

Hermann Tertsch is a Distinguished Fellow (Honorary) at the Gold Institute for International Strategy, a Washington D.C.-based foreign policy and defense think tank.