Diplomacy is often described as an art, involving decisions shaped by sensitive political nuances that require human judgment, cultural understanding, and emotional intelligence — qualities that AI cannot fully replicate.
While AI can support decision-making, it may also manipulate human behavior subtly, especially through systems developed in countries with different geopolitical priorities.
This deepens the AI divide between technologically advanced and resource-limited nations, embedding linguistic and cultural biases and reinforcing global power asymmetries.
As algorithms take their place alongside diplomats, the art of negotiation now meets the science of AI.
The future of diplomacy must lie in fostering a symbiotic relationship where AI enhances human expertise, streamlines processes, and offers new strategic tools while leaving the nuanced art of diplomacy in human hands.
Diplomatic institutions adopting such technologies should also adopt guardrails to clarify how these systems inform decision-making.
To ensure that AI systems function appropriately across diverse cultural contexts, adaptive and responsible AI frameworks should be integrated into policy discussions at the national and international levels.
Crucially, any AI deployment must prioritise human agency.
The goal must not be to automate diplomacy, but to augment it.
AI’s incorporation into diplomacy offers both promise and peril.
While the technology supports efficiency and expands access to information, it must be governed by strong ethical frameworks, particularly when it can shape global power relations through sensitive negotiations.
🔗 Texto adaptado de: Anusha Guru. The Future of Diplomacy: AI’s Expanding Role in International Affairs. Observer Research Foundation, 18/6/2025.
131. In the fragment “adaptive and responsible AI frameworks” (second sentence of the second paragraph), the words “adaptive” and “responsible” modify the expression “AI”.
🔎 Gabarito: ERRADO
🧭 1️⃣ Leitura orientada do item
O item exige análise sintática e semântica do sintagma nominal “adaptive and responsible AI frameworks”.
A banca testa a identificação correta do núcleo do sintagma e dos elementos que o modificam.
📝 2️⃣ Análise técnica do item
No sintagma “adaptive and responsible AI frameworks”, o núcleo nominal é “frameworks”.
O termo “AI” funciona como modificador nominal, especificando o tipo de frameworks.
Os adjetivos “adaptive” e “responsible” qualificam diretamente “frameworks”, e não o termo “AI”.
Portanto, a afirmação do item está em desacordo com a estrutura sintática do grupo nominal.
⚠️ 3️⃣ Armadilhas clássicas da banca
• Confundir o núcleo do sintagma nominal.
• Atribuir adjetivos ao termo mais próximo, e não ao núcleo.
• Ignorar a hierarquia sintática dentro do grupo nominal.
🧠 4️⃣ Resumo B3GE™ Master
✔ Núcleo do sintagma: frameworks.
✔ “AI” é modificador nominal.
✔ “adaptive” e “responsible” qualificam frameworks.
Gabarito: ERRADO.