resilience

In an era of escalating climate disasters, the ability to translate data into life-saving action has never been more critical. For the Asia-Pacific region—the world’s most disaster-prone, this is not an abstract challenge but a daily reality. At the forefront of this battle is the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), which is leveraging artificial intelligence to close the gap between risk knowledge and on-the-ground resilience. In this exclusive Q&A, Kareff May Rafisura, Economic Affairs Officer at the ICT and Disaster Risk Reduction Division of ESCAP, provides a clear-eyed look at their innovative tool, SatGPT, and how it’s changing the game for communities from the remote village to the ministerial office.

1. It’s one thing to see a flood risk map, and another to break ground on a new levee. Could you walk us through how a local official might use SatGPT to confidently decide where to actually build?

Kareff May Rafisura, Economic Affairs Officer at the ICT and Disaster Risk Reduction Division of ESCAP: First, it’s worth noting that there’s growing rethinking within the science and policy communities on the long-term benefits and trade-offs of constructing artificial levees.

Going back to your question, understanding an area’s flood history is key to making smart infrastructure decisions. You wouldn’t build a levee on natural floodplains, for example. Without risk knowledge, levees might not protect communities effectively and could even cause problems downstream or in ecologically sensitive areas. SatGPT offers a rapid mapping service that helps local officials make risk-informed decisions. It significantly reduces the time and cost traditionally required to assess flood characteristics, such as frequency, spatial extent, and impacts, and converts that data into actionable information. This information is critical for decisionmakers who must weigh it alongside economic, social, and environmental considerations when determining whether, and where, to build a levee.

2. We often hear about getting tech “to the last mile.” Picture a rural community leader with a simple smartphone. How does SatGPT’s insight practically reach and help them make a life-saving decision?

Kareff: SatGPT’s strength lies in enhancing historical risk knowledge. It’s not designed to predict the next disaster, but rather to help communities prepare more effectively for it. For instance, when a rural leader needs to decide whether to evacuate ahead of a flood, she will still rely on early warnings from national meteorological services. What SatGPT can do is support smarter ex-ante planning—so that when early warning information arrives, the community is ready to respond quickly. This includes decisions on where to build shelters, how to lay out evacuation routes, and where to preposition relief supplies. These are all critical elements that must be in place to help avert disasters, as consistently demonstrated in the cyclone response histories of India and Bangladesh.

3. Floods are an urgent threat, but what about slower crises like droughts? Is the vision for SatGPT to eventually help with these less visible, but equally devastating, disasters?

Kareff: ESCAP coordinates the long-standing Regional Drought Mechanism, which has been supporting drought-prone countries in gaining access to satellite data, products, tools, and technical expertise—everything they need to conduct drought monitoring and impact assessments more effectively. Our support goes beyond making data available—we work with countries and partners to strengthen institutions and capacities, converting these data into actionable analytics and insights. We are currently working with three Central Asian countries in establishing their own Earth observation-based agricultural drought monitoring systems.

4. AI is powerful, but it can sometimes reflect our own blind spots. How are you ensuring SatGPT doesn’t accidentally worsen inequality by overlooking the most vulnerable communities in its models?

Kareff: You raised a valid concern. That’s why in our capacity development work, our participants combine SatGPT’s flood mapping with socio-economic data to pinpoint who’s most at risk and where. They work on use cases that unpack the exposure of essential services like hospitals and water treatment facilities. When these critical infrastructures fail, it’s the poorest who pay the highest price. That’s why it’s vital to understand the hazards that threaten them.

5. Governments have tight budgets. If you were making the pitch to a Finance Minister, what’s the most compelling argument for investing in SatGPT now versus spending on recovery later?

Kareff: Investing in reducing disaster risk – which involves measures taken before disasters occur to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience (e.g., early warning systems, resilient infrastructure, land-use planning) – is far more cost-effective than recovery. Every dollar invested in disaster risk reduction can save multiple dollars in future losses. While the benefits are context-specific, a recent multi-country study found that for every $1 invested, the return can be as high as $10.50.

6. The region is innovating fast, with countries like Indonesia and Thailand building their own systems. How does SatGPT aim to be a good teammate and connect with these national efforts, rather than just adding another tool to the pile?

Kareff: That’s a good point. And beyond technological innovation, we’re also seeing progress in policy and institutional innovations being put in place. Our intention is not to replace national systems, but to show what’s possible when you make risk knowledge accessible and actionable. We work closely with our national counterparts with a focus on integrating SatGPT insights into existing workflows and systems-not reinventing them.

7. Training young professionals is key. Beyond the technical skills, what’s the most important lesson you hope they take away about using this technology responsibly?

Kareff: I’m glad you recognize that today’s most pressing need goes beyond technical expertise. That’s precisely why our technical capacity-building activities are held alongside youth forums to provide a platform for young people to engage in meaningful conversations around values and motivations. As stakeholders, we all share the responsibility of upholding safe, secure, and trustworthy artificial intelligence systems to support sustainable development.

8. Looking ahead a year, what would a “win” for SatGPT look like on the ground? Is it a specific number of communities better protected, or a faster warning time?

Kareff: Forecasting and enhancing the forecast lead times remains the responsibility of mandated early warning agencies. SatGPT is well-positioned to support efforts to protect more communities. By enhancing the historical understanding of floods, it can help improve the accuracy of early warning information, help communities proactively plan their response, and reduce disaster risk ex-ante. In that sense, I would say that effective SatGPT roll-out would amount to both gains in space and time – more communities being warned with improved lead times for mitigative response with more reliable historical data for granular risk characterization.

9. The document mentions turning the Jakarta Declaration into action. From your vantage point, what’s the biggest spark of progress you’ve seen so far?

Kareff: One of the most promising sparks of progress has been the strengthened regional cooperation aimed at enhancing the capacity of countries—especially the countries in special situations—to overcome barriers to accessing the benefits of innovative geospatial applications. With the support of ESCAP members, we are implementing field projects, providing capacity-building and technical assistance, facilitating expert exchange, and knowledge sharing across more than a dozen countries. These efforts are helping to develop space-based solutions from the ground up to tackle sustainable development challenges such as urban poverty, air pollution, droughts, floods, and crop biodiversity loss.

10. Finally, behind all the data and code, you mention this is about protecting lives. Has working on SatGPT given you a new perspective on what “resilience” truly means for a family facing a flood?

Kareff: Having lived and worked for the United Nations in some of the world’s most flood-prone countries, I’ve witnessed first-hand how the lack of historical data can lead to underinvestment in risk reduction. Tools like SatGPT and other digital innovations are not silver bullets, but they help close this gap by converting geospatial data into actionable insights – quickly and more accessibly – to guide communities to prepare and protect lives and livelihoods.

The conversation with Kareff May Rafisura underscores a pivotal shift in disaster risk management: from reactive recovery to intelligent, data-driven preparedness. SatGPT represents more than a technological achievement; it is a practical instrument of empowerment, ensuring that from the finance minister to the rural community leader, the best available knowledge informs the decisions that save lives and safeguard futures. In the fragile balance between human vulnerability and environmental force, such tools are not just helpful, they are essential. The future of resilience in the Asia-Pacific is being written today, not in the aftermath of disaster, but in the proactive, thoughtful application of innovation like SatGPT.

In Kwara, a Muslim-majority state in north-central Nigeria where religious traditions govern daily life, some young women are defying cultural expectations through football.

They have discovered the camaraderie, competitive spirit, and emotional journey of the sport, while facing disapproval from those who question its appropriateness for modestly dressed women.

When 17-year-old Maryam Muhammed heads to practise at the Model Queens Football Academy in Ilorin, she endures the intense heat — made more challenging by her hijab and leggings — and community criticism.

“They tell me I will not achieve anything. But I believe I will achieve something big,” she says, despite regularly encountering taunts on her way to training.

Though sometimes uncomfortable, maintaining modest dress while playing is non-negotiable for her.

“Sometimes it feels like I want to open the hijab, but I must not expose my hair,” she explained. “I have to put it on as a good Muslim.”

FIFA initially banned hijabs in 2007 on safety grounds, resulting in Iran’s women’s team being excluded from a 2012 Olympic qualifier. The restriction was eased in 2012 and fully lifted in 2014. Morocco’s Nouhaila Benzina made history as the first hijab-wearing player at a senior women’s World Cup in 2023.

Kehinde Muhammed, Maryam’s mother, has weathered criticism for supporting her daughter’s passion. “So many people discouraged me,” she admitted. “But I respect my children’s decisions. I support her and keep praying for her.”

She creates custom hijabs matching team jerseys, emphasising: “I counsel her that this is the normal way you are supposed to be dressed as a Muslim.”

Model Queens coach Muyhideen Abdulwahab works to change community perceptions. “We go out to meet parents, to tell them there are laws in place for modest dressing,” he said. “Despite that, some still say no.”

Nineteen-year-old team member Bashirat Omotosho balances her love for football with family responsibilities. She often misses training to help her mother sell puff puff, a fried dough snack, at their roadside stall to support the family.

“Training is often in the morning, but I have to be here,” she explained while serving customers, watching her teammates sometimes jog past during practice. “I cannot leave my mum — this is how I earn money.”

Titilayo Omotosho, Bashirat’s mother, initially opposed her daughter’s athletic ambitions.

“Why would a lady choose football?” she questioned.

Omotosho’s stance softened after her husband’s approval and seeing successful Muslim players like Nigeria star Asisat Oshoala. “Seeing other Muslim girls succeed, like Asisat, encouraged us to let her play,” she said, referencing the record six-time African Women’s Footballer of the Year. Oshoala, who plays without a hijab, comes from Lagos in southwest Nigeria, where Islamic practices are less conservative.

According to local football administrator Ambali Abdulrazak, despite growing interest, female participation remains limited in Ilorin.

The Nigeria Women’s Football League (NWFL) ranks among Africa’s strongest, dominated by southern clubs from Lagos and Port Harcourt, where infrastructure and social support are more established. Northern and central regions face cultural and religious barriers, though grassroots initiatives are expanding.

Nationwide, women’s football is gaining popularity, driven by the national team’s success, increased sponsorships, and development programmes. Since 2020, NWFL viewership has increased by 40 percent, with match attendance rising 35 percent in 2024, according to Nigerian media company iTelemedia, which monitors audience trends across local leagues.

During a recent training session, Muhammed and her teammates practised on a sandy school pitch as the sun set, their voices mingling with the muezzin’s call to prayer from a nearby mosque.

On August 29, Muhammed captained the Model Queens in a youth tournament final, which they lost. She high-fived teammates and celebrated as they received runners-up medals, but later cried alone in her room over the defeat.

Her family’s support and faith sustain her determination. “I really love this sport. I have a passion for it,” she said. “Since my parents support me, there is nothing stopping me. Football is my dream.”

A look at two of this week’s top high school football games in the Southland:

THURSDAY

Eastvale Roosevelt (3-2) at Corona Centennial (4-1), 7:30 p.m.

Centennial tries to give coach Matt Logan his 300th career victory. Roosevelt is on a three-game winning streak, but the Huskies are headed to another Division 1 playoff berth. The pick: Centennial.

FRIDAY

Dorsey (2-3) at Crenshaw (4-1), 7 p.m.

Playing without coach Robert Garrett (administrative leave), Crenshaw continues to show resilience behind quarterback Danniel Flowers. This is a key Coliseum League opener because the winner figures to face King/Drew to decide the league title. Dorsey needs to get the ball to its playmakers, led by Stafon Johnson Jr. The pick: Dorsey.

In the wake of Afghanistan’s deadly earthquake, Al Jazeera’s photojournalist Sorin Furcoi captures both the devastation left behind and the strength of those determined to rebuild.

England fans may had doubt but they did not show it at Stadion Letzigrund as those behind the goal to Wiegman’s right sang her name as they trailed 2-0.

When things eventually started going to plan, England still relied on plenty of luck.

The ball didn’t quite drop for Sweden on set-pieces, and as extra time wore on, momentum felt like it was with England.

But in the shootout, it was Sweden’s game to win. They had two chances to seal victory with penalties of their own and managed to squander both.

Sweden goalkeeper Falk wasted the first opportunity, blasting the ball over the crossbar, before Hampton dived low to save Jakobsson’s spot-kick.

As Sweden’s senior players missed their opportunities, England’s most experienced was ready to take her moment.

It was fitting that 33-year-old Bronze, playing in her seventh major tournament, delivered when it mattered.

Someone who epitomises England’s resilience, she stepped up, took a deep breath and thumped her penalty into the roof of the net.

A roar erupted from Bronze as she looked at the supporters behind the goal, ripping off tape – that she had put on herself during the match – in the process.

Around half an hour earlier, she had kicked the hoardings behind the same net – a release of emotion as she kickstarted England’s comeback.

“Lucy was chaotic in herself, right? There was a lot going on with her. She became a physio, she became a striker, she nailed the best penalty of the day,” said team-mate Mead.

“I think Lucy really showed her experience in those moments. She’s our most experienced England player and I think she was one of the players that very much got the determination out of us all today.”

Having failed to convert four penalties, Wiegman admitted she was “really concerned” that England were heading out.

But it was fitting that Bronze helped carry her team over the line.

“She is just one of a kind. I have never seen this before in my life. I have worked with so many incredible football players but what she does and her mentality,” said Wiegman.

“The penalty, the goal – that is not what defines her. What defines her is that resilience, that fight. The only way to get her off the pitch is in a wheelchair.”

In the digital age, where power dynamics are increasingly defined by information flows and algorithmic influence, cyberspace has evolved from a mere technical domain into a fully fledged geopolitical arena. As Thomas Rid has argued, cyberwar is not a rupture but an extension of politics by other means, characterized by ambiguity, plausible deniability, and the absence of clear thresholds. In this new order, cybersecurity acts as an adaptive shield, protecting vital systems, while cyber defense becomes the digital sword, mobilizing state capabilities to detect, neutralize, and retaliate. This strategic pairing gives rise to an integrated doctrine, where every firewall becomes a sensor and every breach an opportunity for strategic hardening.

Thus, twenty-first-century conflicts no longer begin with declarations of war but with lines of malicious code. State-sponsored cyberattacks, technological espionage, and mass disinformation campaigns are the weapons of the future: silent yet potentially paralyzing. In this shadow war, financial systems, smart grids, healthcare infrastructures, and state institutions become critical pressure points, exposed to systemic shocks that can dislocate national continuity. In response, digital resilience is no longer a defensive posture but a vital imperative. It rests on the fusion of preventive cybersecurity and active cyber defense, forming an invisible architecture that balances anticipation with response. Partnerships like the one between Microsoft and U.S. Cyber Command, where Azure Sentinel’s AI bolsters offensive operations against Chinese APTs, illustrate the hybridization of technological shield and geopolitical weapon. Yet attribution remains a strategic Achilles’ heel; opacity and decentralization of attacks hamper deterrence logic.

For these reasons and inspired by nuclear doctrines, some states are now developing cyber deterrence strategies based on denial (making the attack ineffective) and targeted retaliation (imposing dissuasive costs). The U.S. Cyber Command’s “persistent engagement” model exemplifies this approach, where anticipation, calibrated response, and cognitive dominance form a triptych of integrated deterrence. On the other hand, the rise of artificial intelligence is disrupting this balance at dizzying speed. China’s DeepSeek R1, for instance, demonstrates that AI is no longer merely a tool for data processing but an autonomous force capable of identifying threats, executing countermeasures, and even making tactical decisions. This signals the emergence of a new form of algorithmic sovereignty, where strategic initiative shifts from human to calculated agency.

This paradigm shift is reshaping the military domain as well. Autonomous drones, automated intelligence platforms, and smart weapons systems are redefining doctrines of technological supremacy. Ukraine’s “Spider Web” operation marked a doctrinal rupture, deploying swarms of AI-coordinated micro-drones capable of dynamic, adaptive targeting in cluttered environments. It heralds the advent of fluid, decentralized warfare and prefigures future algorithmic conflicts.

Big Tech: Geopolitical Hydras

When Big Tech dictates the rules of cyberspace, states become variables in someone else’s equation. It is no longer armies but platforms that shape power balances. This paradigm shift cements the rise of an extraterritorial technological power not based on monopoly of legitimate violence but on mastery of data flows and digital architectures. Then, GAFAM (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft) now operates as systemic entities, wielding influence that eclipses traditional state sovereignty. Their power, driven by an unprecedented concentration of computational, financial, and informational capital, grants them a structuring role in international relations, rivaling even the core prerogatives of the state.

This rise isn’t merely economic or technological; it redefines global governance. These corporations act as the architects of the “matrix politica,” enforcing opaque algorithmic regulation of public discourse, social behaviors, and collective perception. By replacing legitimate legal norms with proprietary logic, they institute an unelected algorithmic order, generating “invisible prisons” where individuals become exploitable variables and national sovereignty becomes a residual fiction.

In this context, any viable cyber defense or deterrence strategy must confront this structural asymmetry. Strengthening state defenses against conventional cyber threats is no longer sufficient. The relationship between public authority and private technological hegemony must be recalibrated. Effective digital resilience demands a democratic reconquest of communication infrastructures and political oversight of the normative power wielded by platforms. Absent such rebalancing, cyberspace will continue to slide into a deterritorialized algorithmic sovereignty that deeply reconfigures the exercise of power in the 21st century.

This silent capture of normative power presents a strategic challenge to cyber deterrence doctrines. After all, what is the purpose of state deterrence if critical infrastructures, codebases, and mass cognitive systems are controlled by transnational private entities? Digital sovereignty must encompass offensive capabilities against state-backed cyber aggressors and against hegemonic drifts of platforms capable of reshaping cognitive battlegrounds, manipulating public perception, and influencing political decisions in real time.

This revolution comes at a cost. Deep learning algorithms can now launch sophisticated cyberattacks, detect invisible vulnerabilities, and strike without warning, pushing human intervention into the background. AI thus generates a strategic paradox: it enhances resilience while simultaneously magnifying vulnerabilities. Advances like DeepMind’s AlphaFold show how such technologies permeate critical domains, from biology to cybersecurity, blurring the lines between scientific progress and digital militarization. In this new era, AI is no longer a tool; it is a geopolitical actor.

In fact, major powers and actors are investing in this revolution in different ways. The United States, a pioneer in AI research, focuses on innovation and developing offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. China, aiming for technological supremacy by 2030, is coupling digital sovereignty with state surveillance to bolster its global position. The European Union adopts a more regulatory and ethical approach, seeking to govern AI use while preserving its technological autonomy.

Warfare in the Age of AI

The military domain, too, is being swept into the vortex of AI-led automation. Autonomous drones, smart weapon systems, and automated intelligence platforms are reshaping defense doctrines, ushering in a new form of technological supremacy. These tools offer asymmetric advantages to well-equipped powers but also pave the way for an unprecedented militarization of cyberspace.

Delegating lethal decisions to machines raises profound ethical dilemmas: who bears responsibility for algorithmic misfires? How do we regulate autonomous weapons in a world where legal norms lag behind innovation? Without clear answers, AI risks transforming the battlefield into a dehumanized theater of operations beyond political and moral control.

Subsequently, the proliferation of hybrid threats, cyberattacks, disinformation, and covert operations underscores the urgency of enhanced international cooperation. In fact, the Russo-Ukrainian conflict has highlighted cyberspace’s centrality in modern warfare, with the rise of cyber-volunteers, hacktivists, and destabilization campaigns. Ukraine’s IT Army exemplifies a new form of cyber mobility, where citizens and transnational collectives become key players in cyber conflict.

In this regard, Ukraine’s “Spider Web” operation against Russian targets demonstrates a new military application of AI in hybrid warfare. Here, AI no longer acts as a mere optimizer but as a digital war commander, orchestrating data collection, target identification, battlefield navigation, and dynamic strike execution. This machine-learning-powered architecture transforms each drone into both a sensor and a lethal vector, capable of real-time adaptation. More than a technological feat, Spider Web signals a metamorphosis of warfare, with AI assuming operational control and ushering in an era of autonomous algorithmic wars.

Fragmented Tech Ecosystems and Strategic Rivalries

Meanwhile, the militarization of cyberspace is accelerating. Leading powers are developing advanced cyber weapons, espionage tools, and surveillance systems to maintain digital supremacy. China’s “Made in China 2025” strategy channels massive investment into cybersecurity and tech sovereignty, while the U.S. doubles down on proactive defense to safeguard its hegemonic edge.

This trend drives increasing fragmentation of the global digital landscape, undermining the ideal of an open internet and encouraging the formation of rival digital blocs. The Sino-American tech rivalry extends beyond infrastructure development, despite enduring interdependencies in key sectors. While semiconductor and 5G decoupling advances, shared reliance persists in AI, cloud computing, and components. This duality complicates strategic choices. Each power must navigate between tech independence and global innovation access, accelerating cyber-nationalism and deepening digital polarization. Huawei’s Harmony OS and U.S. bans on Chinese semiconductors are clear signs of a growing digital decoupling that could redefine global tech ecosystems.

In this climate of intensifying threats and systemic interdependence, states are turning to cyber sovereignty strategies to secure critical infrastructure and reduce exposure to foreign interference. This forms part of a broader reconfiguration of global digital order, where control over data and information flows becomes a strategic lever.

International bodies such as NATO and the EU are gradually adapting. The EU’s Cyber Rapid Response Teams (CRRTs) and NATO’s adoption of offensive cyber doctrines signal a growing intent to pool resources and establish collective response mechanisms. Thus, China exemplifies the sovereigntist approach: its Great Firewall symbolizes a strategy combining national infrastructure protection, strict data regulation, and bolstered cyber-offensive capabilities.

From Code to Context: Redefining Cyberwarfare

Cyberwarfare is no longer about code but about context. Victory lies in merging civilian neural networks, predictive algorithms, and bio-neural systems, where every smartphone becomes a sensor and every hacktivist a cognitive disruptor. Tomorrow’s cyber defense rests on algorithmic sovereignty: an ecosystem where tactical metaverses, morphic AI drones, and quantum blockchains redefine resilience. In addition, Ukraine has shown that the future belongs to those who break hierarchies to build combat bio-networks—info-centric systems powered by quantum geolocation and operational proliferation of cyber volunteers. In this borderless arena, victory is won not by hacking machines but by hacking perceptions, hybridizing human agency, generative AI, and legal ambiguity.

Furthermore, cybersecurity is no longer a static defense line but a fractal weapon with evolutionary capabilities, where every intrusion becomes a counter-weapon and every psychokinetic attack an information battleground. That’s to say, this next-gen cyber architecture is based on adaptive algorithmic systems capable of dynamic reconfiguration in the face of ever-mutating threats. Its strength lies in an advanced synergy of AI, quantum cryptography, and autonomous protocols—modular, decentralized, and self-replicating systems that respond proportionately to the intensity and nature of cyberattacks. In a world shaped by asymmetry and uncertainty, this model grants states algorithmic superiority, shaping tomorrow’s deterrence and digital resilience.

Therefore, in the face of this accelerating tech revolution, global AI governance is no longer optional—it’s an existential necessity. Without robust legal frameworks and multilateral oversight, the world risks plunging into a digital arms race defined by opacity, irresponsibility, and strategic instability. It is no longer about regulating innovation; it is about preserving global balance in a world where the boundaries between war and peace, civil and military, and human and machine are increasingly blurred. Namely, an international architecture of trust and transparency is essential to prevent AI from becoming the unaccountable arbiter of tomorrow’s conflicts.

Disruption Scenario: Toward Unchecked Algorithmic Warfare

By 2032, the lack of international regulation on military AI triggers an uncontrolled rise of autonomous weapons and AI-powered cyber capabilities. Amid mounting tensions between the West and the Sino-Russian bloc, the race for AI military supremacy enters a tipping point. China, after scaling up AI militarization with Central Asian partners, unleashes targeted cyberattacks against European logistics and energy systems, paralyzing large parts of the continent. Simultaneously, autonomous drone swarms developed under a Sino-Russian program infiltrate NATO airspace disguised as meteorological probes.

Behind the scenes, Russia orchestrates a massive cognitive warfare operation using generative AI trained to manipulate Western public opinion. Deepfakes, forged documents, and fake military orders—Europe’s political systems are plunged into information chaos. In several capitals, key decisions are based on alerts fabricated by hostile AI. Thus, a devastating strike then hits a NATO logistics hub in the Baltic Sea, causing significant casualties. No state claims responsibility, but suspicion falls on Russia. Western attribution systems, despite being AI-enhanced, are circumvented by adversarial AI obfuscation networks. Indeed, caught in a spiral of disinformation and decision paralysis, a NATO member launches a massive cyber counterattack on Russian civilian infrastructure. Moscow retaliates with a hybrid strike combining autonomous weapons, electronic warfare, and satellite disruption. Within a week, a high-intensity hybrid conflict erupts regionally, with immediate nuclear escalation risk. Traditional command chains are disabled, decisions are made under AI pressure, and human agency vanishes. Strategic equilibrium, once upheld by nuclear deterrence and diplomacy, collapses under the weight of self-evolving, autonomous algorithms.

Moreover, conflicts no longer begin with declarations of war: they emerge, self-perpetuate, and unfold in an algorithmic fog where the line between peace and hostility vanishes. Humanity then realizes that, in failing to regulate, it has surrendered control to hostile, elusive, and autonomous intelligences.

Coding Sovereignty in the Algorithmic Fog

The future of cybersecurity lies in the ability of states to reconcile innovation, regulation, and strategic cooperation. The implementation of robust cyber doctrines, blending deterrence, algorithmic resilience, and control over critical infrastructure, will be key to preserving national sovereignty and global stability. That is to say, in the age of information supremacy, building cyber coalitions, massively investing in sovereign digital infrastructures, and establishing binding international norms are essential to secure peace and security. Cybersecurity is no longer a defensive tool; it is a core pillar of state power.

This indicates that cyberwar is no longer a future scenario; it is a strategic reality where supremacy depends on integrating offensive and defensive capabilities into a deterrent cyber ecosystem. The convergence of cyber intelligence, algorithmic resilience, and anticipatory response is reshaping defense doctrines, establishing a digital sovereignty rooted in system self-learning, cognitive warfare, and adversary vulnerability exploitation.

Finally, in this asymmetrical theatre, mastery over critical infrastructure and the ability to conduct hybrid operations will determine the balance of power in a cyberspace that has become the epicenter of global strategic rivalries. In the algorithmic fog of tomorrow’s wars, sovereignty is no longer declared, but it is coded, learned, and defended with every line of data.

May 20 (UPI) — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, marked the 123rd anniversary of Cuban Independence Day on Tuesday.

“On Cuba’s Independence Day, I want to express my unwavering support and solidarity for the Cuban people,” Rubio said in a prepared statement.

“I commend all those who have stood up against over six decades of brutal repression, censorship and human rights violations at the hands of the illegitimate Cuban regime,” Rubio said.

“Their tireless advocacy for a free, democratic and prosperous Cuba remains a beacon of hope and resistance for the world,” he added. “Today we honor their sacrifice, courage and resilience.”

Cuban Independence Day marks the anniversary of the date when Cuba officially became independent of Spain in 1902.

Cuban pro-democracy groups in the greater Miami area also are celebrating Cuban Independence Day with a rally scheduled in Tamiami Park during the evening hours, WFLA reported.

The rally’s aim is to pressure the Cuban dictatorship and communist government to leave the island nation.

Bay of Pigs Assault Brigade veteran Rafael Montalvo said President Donald Trump could help remove the Cuban regime through his foreign policy and “restore the island into a first-class destination,” according to the WFLA report.

Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants and in February expanded visa restrictions on Cuban officials and others who are forcing Cuban citizens to participate in the Cuban labor export programs.

Rubio said Cuban elites profit from the forced labor of workers, including skilled healthcare workers who are forced to provide healthcare services overseas.

The Cuban labor export program deprives Cubans of much-needed medical care, he said.

“The United States is committed to countering forced labor practices around the globe,” he added.

“To do so, we must promote accountability, not just for Cuban officials responsible for these policies, but also those complicit in the exploitation and forced labor of Cuban workers,” Rubio said.