• The AI treaty claims to protect human rights, but Israel’s inclusion raises concerns over its use of surveillance tech.
• The treaty highlights Western hypocrisy, as its signatories have histories of human rights abuses and unethical AI use.
In an unprecedented move, the UK, US, EU, and Israel have signed the world’s first AI treaty under the banner of safeguarding human rights and democracy in the face of advancing technology. While the treaty’s intentions may seem noble, the inclusion of Israel raises significant concerns, particularly given its track record of human rights violations and controversial use of surveillance technology. At a time when the West postures as the global moral authority, this development exposes a deepening hypocrisy, casting doubt on its credibility as a guardian of human rights in the era of artificial intelligence.
Israel’s involvement in the AI treaty comes at a time when the nation’s use of surveillance and cyber warfare tools has drawn widespread condemnation. The *NSO Group* scandal, in which Israeli-made *Pegasus* spyware was used to hack journalists, activists, and political figures globally, illustrates how AI and tech can be wielded as tools of oppression rather than empowerment. For a treaty intended to ensure AI aligns with “human rights and the rule of law,” signing up a state embroiled in such hacking scandals calls into question the true priorities behind this initiative. Are these governments truly committed to ethical AI, or merely extending their influence under a convenient moral guise?
Equally troubling is the role of the West itself. Historically, the US and its allies have prided themselves on being champions of human rights. Yet, recent actions have shattered that image. From illegal wars in the Middle East to the drone strikes that have killed civilians, the Western claim to moral superiority is in tatters. AI is just the latest battleground where this hypocrisy is laid bare. How can Western powers, who have condoned human rights abuses and perpetrated acts of aggression, now lecture the world on the ethical use of technology?
The West’s self-proclaimed leadership on AI governance contrasts starkly with its own questionable use of AI in warfare and surveillance. The US, in particular, has deployed AI-driven drones and advanced military systems in conflicts where innocent lives were lost. Meanwhile, both the US and UK have conducted mass surveillance programs that infringe upon the privacy rights of millions of citizens globally. These abuses of power are eerily similar to the risks the AI treaty seeks to mitigate.
Moreover, the global South and other marginalized nations are all too familiar with the double standards that define Western intervention. While the West pushes for ethical AI regulations, it simultaneously profits from the sale of military-grade surveillance tech to authoritarian regimes. The West’s involvement in global conflicts and its role in supplying repressive technologies make it impossible for anyone to take its moral posturing seriously.
At a time when AI regulation is desperately needed, the signing of this treaty—by those who have repeatedly flouted international law and human rights—risks becoming yet another instance of performative diplomacy. For the world to take these efforts seriously, those responsible for human rights violations—whether through AI or other means—must be held accountable. Until that happens, the West’s claim to be a protector of ethical AI will remain a hollow charade.
By including nations like Israel, and given its own human rights shortcomings, the West demonstrates once again that it is incapable of embodying the very values it claims to protect. The AI treaty, as historic as it may seem, is deeply compromised by the hypocrisy of its signatories. It serves as a reminder that the true challenge lies not in regulating AI but in ensuring those who wield its power are held to the same standards they set for others.
