Preparing future leaders in diplomacy and governance in the age of AI

“Can machines think?” was the provocative question once posed by Alan Turing in his seminal 1950 paper, “Computing Machinery and Intelligence.” Turing’s thought experiment on “thinking” machines would later inspire pioneers such as John McCarthy and Geoffrey Hinton, whose groundbreaking work in computer programming and artificial neural networks, respectively, laid the foundations for what we now perceive with fascination and existential unease: artificial intelligence (AI).

What began as a theoretical concept has evolved into a transformative force reshaping nearly every aspect of modern life. Today, AI can generate images and videos, personalize travel itineraries, manage fitness goals and recommend meals. Unsurprisingly, it has also found its way into classrooms and workplaces, including those that serve as a training ground for future diplomats, public servants, policy analysts and development practitioners.

AI is increasingly embedded in the daily work of lawmakers, trade negotiators, security specialists, planning officers and administrative personnel. Tasks that once required hours of research, drafting or data processing can now be completed in minutes. Routine operations have become more efficient, and the risk of human error is reduced.

Yet for all its promise, AI also presents glaring challenges that educational institutions can no longer afford to brush aside, especially when it is used as a substitute instead of a supplementary tool.

Empirical evidence collected by researchers cited in a study led by Binny Jose in 2025 titled “The Cognitive Paradox of AI In Education: Between Enhancement and Erosion” point to delays in developing critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity and memory retention skills among students with extensive AI use. These skills are part and parcel to developing some of the core competencies of future practitioners and leaders in diplomacy and governance, which include but are not limited to: decision-making, policy development, capacity building, ethical leadership and management, conflict resolution and strategic foresight.

Recognizing that banning the use of AI is far from a realistic solution to the problem, a multi-level, cross-sectoral, interdisciplinary, ethics-based and human-centered approach is crucial to formulating a technologically adaptive but more inclusive, learner-centered and outcomes-based teaching methodology and pedagogy.

Technology will continue to evolve and new tools will inevitably replace old ones, but the human element will never lose its relevance unless we allow it to. Our fear of being replaced by AI or robots is magnified by gaps in policies, initiatives and infrastructure to sufficiently equip both faculty and students in the ethical and responsible incorporation of these tools in the classroom, and for their competencies and skills to transition in a timely manner.

AI was neither built to design legislation nor make geostrategic decisions independently. It is a tool that should help augment human capabilities. As we prepare the next generation of diplomats and public servants in an AI-driven world, our goal should not be simply to teach them how to use these technologies but to lead with empathy, compassion, humility, dignity and integrity. Otherwise, we could end up in a more troubling situation in the future when we ask ourselves, “Can humans still think?”

*      *      *

Catherine Dee Samaniego is chair of the Diplomacy and International Affairs Program at the De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde School of Diplomacy and Governance.