Dream Peace

To dream about peace is as old as humanity. However, the people who work on the development of weapons and train to use them vastly outnumbers those who think or dream up peace. The strategies and advice about warfare ranging from Aurel to Clausewitz have been studied carefully and the short-cut summary “if you want peace, prepare for war” sounds like a plausible solution to many problematic war-like situations (hybrid wars) even today. Let’s give it a try and dream up peace. There exits already an extensive literature on peace-keeping (forces) an the difficult role of the UN in these efforts. How about a challenge to this conventional wisdom. Voting in the UN should be weighted. The weights are inverse-proportional to a country’s amount of production and trade in arms measured over the last 10, 50, 100, 251 or 2501 years. The probability to favour peace in such a reformed voting system of the UN would shift further peace rather than arms trade and use of weapons in conflict. Of course, a crucial point is the definition of what is a weapon. Hybrid war and dual-use technologies could undermine the new balance of power at the UN. If countries with no arms production and arms trade get the upper hand at the UN decision-making, the peace-keeping force could still be mandated and delegated to joint forces. This could work as a disincentive for Trump to try to sell arms and enter into large-scale arms trade between the US and China. (Image: Ikarus-by-Picasso-at-UNESCO-headquarters-2024-Paris).

Ikarus-by-Picasso-at-UNESCO-headquarters-2024-Paris.jpeg

“what” and “how” in consulting

The scope of both “what” and “how” to consult have been considerably enlarged in the 2020s. The rise of the internet and digital formats in consulting have put an indigestible amount of mostly well-intended advice to the public at large. Language barriers are coming down in the digestion of ever broader as well as more interdisciplinary forms of knowledge. The “what” in consulting seems to be endless and yet the expectations on advanced expertise have risen as well. The calls for easy language summaries, as provided and popular with generative AI, pose a challenge to consulting on more interrelated or “messy” problems. The broad availability of AI in our pockets, watches or glasses amplify the potential to address really tough issues in consulting leaving the easy advice to the machines repairing other machines. Consulting may then focus on human interaction which needs to fix norms and guidelines in moral and practical matters. Consulting might take much more the form of interpretation and contextualization of information beyond simple information gathering. The “how” in consulting is conditional on “what” is the issue in question. From the antique dialog over (medieval) confessions (Stegmaier, Fuerst 1993) and book writing, we have moved to digital formats with textual, vocal and visual formats (Image and video). Hybrid formats enrich the consulting experience for the persons asking for advice as well as those offering it. (Image: Consulting on what and how to plant in city streets 2026-8 Paris)

Consulting on what and how to plant in city streets 2026-8 Paris

Philosophy in consulting

What has consulting to do with philosophy? How much philosophy in consulting? If we think of business consulting, there is very little philosophy in most of it. Some ethical considerations might enter the consulting with respect to mass lay-offs, ethical considerations in supply chains or handling waste. The philosophy of consulting, however, deals with one of the oldest philosophical practices (Stegmaier 1993). Since Plato and Socrates the dialogue of persons is at the foundation of philosophy. Throughout the history of philosophy the dialogue as the basis of exchanging ideas and controversies can be regarded as a philosophical practice particularly if it deals with topics beyond daily concerns. The consulting by philosophers has taken the form of speeches as well as book publications. Marc Aurel or Montaigne have written famous accounts of their consulting advice to political leaders. Rousseau for education or Kuhn for science have been influential with their philosophy intended as consulting beyond the inter-individual, dialogue-oriented form. The dialogue with a reader used to be rather exclusive until the invention of the printed press. Apelt introduced the “ethics of discourse” followed by a theory of communicative action (Habermas). Even modern governance structures “incorporate” committees as institutionalized consulting to advice with multiple and at best diverse perspectives as guidelines to persons in leadership positions. In order to counterbalance individual leadership of prime ministers, judges or university presidents, institutionalized internal consulting has been implemented (Stegmaier 1993). Consulting resistant leaders probably had some of the worst fates if we think of Julius Caesar. Seeking advice is only one side of the coin. Giving advice is the other one. Now we leave the “why” of philosophy in consulting and move to the questions of “what” and “how” to consult.

Paris start-up 2026 Station

Autonomous drones

The weapon industry is shifting rapidly. Beyond slow moving tanks, modern warfare has adopted and applies autonomous drones in the battlefield. On the title page of the NYT of 2026-8-26 we learn about a Russian autonomous drone with US hardware technology (Nvidia Jetson Orin microPC) to kill 3 civilians without them being really the target. These drones are trained to select their target autonomously without a human in control. It is the pre-trained machine which decides on the target and whether to “take-out” the target. Disguised objects may survive for longer. People disguised as useless objects have a higher probability to escape detection if you do not fit into the drone’s visual identification. Autonomy based on artificial intelligence has its limits too. Military intelligence will continue to rely a lot on human intelligence to protect us from the realities of autonomous drones.  

Hiding from drone attack at BNF Paris 2026-8

Autonomy in swarm

Swarm behavior is a fascinating research area. Almost all scientific disciplines feature some interest and publication in this area. The biological origins have been associated a lot with the marvelous behavior and patterns formed by fish moving about in swarms. Some species of birds show similar patterns of collective and somehow coordinated swarm movement. It appears to be tricky to safeguard some form of autonomy in the overriding mass behavior and mass movement.
Recent advances in this field by Li, Li & Zhao (2023) model such behavior within a predator-prey framework to explain the evolution of overall swarm behavior. Whereas “prey” strategies consist in “flocking” and “swirling” to irritate predator(s), the predators make use of “dispersion”, “confusion” as well as “marginal predation tactics”. Additionally, several assumptions go into the modeling of swarm behavioral evolution: agent observation, agent dynamics, and the environment. The mixed cooperative-competitive multi-agent setting applies reinforcement learning, additionally. The framework of evolution has 5 driving forces: (1) homogeneity of a swarm (parameter sharing); (2) actor with decentralized critic network; (3) replay buffer to enhance learning; (4) rewards for predator and loss for prey; (5) learning algorithm.
The modeling approach reveals the impact of an agent-critic network (potential of autonomous behavior) for protection of a swarm in a predator-prey scenario. (Image: fish in fish bowl 2024)

Learn from failures

It is easier said than done. Acknowledge a failure and most people will probably pretend to know better already. Don’t worry. This is not the case. Many of the best “learnings” have come from learnings from failures, be they own mistakes or of other persons, organizations or institutions. If you really want to learn from a person, try to get honest take home messages from their “best” failures. Marc Aurel has proposed this in his writings on governance and, prior to him, Aristotle compared Greek constitutions to derive the most adequate, or the best of the many failures to achieve democracy. This is a perspective if you aim to improve on the achievements of current or past actors. Incumbents can only tell you about how they got where they are currently, not about any likelihood of future occasions. Hence, current failures are a very valid source for learning.

Bob the AI-enhanced builder

Most kids today and GenZ youth have come across the TV-series “Bob the builder”. Baby boomer parents have been worried about the work ethos which might be the hidden agenda of the videos. In 2026 we can now draft a new episode called “Bob the AI-builder”. Many episodes could be re-written when Bob and his team have access and get training with AI toolboxes. The study published by ActivTrak (2026-3-11) reports that companies make on average use of 7+ different AI-tools, up from 2 in 2023. This constitutes a hint that complexity at work is increasing as each tool has to be managed and the boundaries of its use need to be respected. As most search engines offer an AI-short cut to search it is not surprising that now 80% of the workforce use some form of AI in 2026. The productivity increases in quantitative terms as more output can be achieved in the same time or slightly shorter work days. However, workload is moved even more to weekends now.
The upcoming challenge through AI-tools is the reduced “the AI users’ focus time”, which suffered 9% compared to non-users. For Bob the AI-enhanced builder this means “AI is being used as an additional productivity layer, not a substitute for existing work”. The overall workload is not reduced by AI. The intensity of work increased between 2023-2025.
There is still a puzzle in the data. Multitasking (+12%) and collaboration (+34%) both increased, but the duration of an average focused session and focus efficiency dropped. The challenges for employees increase. Handling simultaneous processes and keeping an open mind to collaboration are key competences for Bob the AI-enhanced builder.
(Image: LEGO-shop in Paris 2026-2)

Defense strategies

Technological developments of drones, aircrafts, rockets and satellites take a lot of time. In order to produce not only prototypes, but ready-to-use weapons, it needs advanced engineering competencies and capacities as well. The arrival of hypersonic rockets, that fly at the speed of 5 Mach necessitate a rethinking of defense strategies to be able to react in ever shorter time spells to external threats. The European Defence Fund intends to spend almost 3 billion € over 7 years to prepare our defense strategies in the EU for the next generation of lethal weapons.
On 2026-3-4 the Iran-regime made use of such a fast rocket, but it was possible to intercept its flight just in time by NATO-allies. Yes, unfortunately “rocket science” is back on the research agenda. In fact, this research has been ongoing across the world, just a bit more below the public radar.
Missions to the moon or mars have been intensified in recent years. This is not surprising or spectacular fact. For some it is surprising, that the number of countries (for example India) which are active in rocket science is increasing and spreading further across the globe. The multipolarity of the international political arena seems more evident in 2026-3.

National interest

Especially in times of international conflicts, it is customary that politicians refer to “the national interest” as a justification for their actions beyond the state borders, commonly named foreign policy. There is a huge literature on the subject, in which the concept of the national interest is useful, (1) because it suggests some higher ranking political goal, (2) because it clarifies and prioritizes a country’s goals, particularly at times of military interventions and (3) because it “arouses the support necessary to move towards a realization of the goals” (Rosenau 1968, Int. Encycl. p.34).
A critical assessment of this concept in international relations should start with the democratic perspective that a country’s government is subject to regular elections, whereby the goals a previous majority had put forward, might substantially change as a new majority takes the lead. Continuation of the same foreign policies is not excluded, but at least subject to revision. In authoritarian regimes the definition of the national interest is probably more stable, because authoritarian leadership does not hesitate to define the national interest in “splendid isolation” from its people.
Overall, the concept appears to serve mainly communication purposes, both internally as well as towards the outside as in communicable foreign policy goals. Conflicts between countries can thus be named and become subject to diplomacy and international treaties. But we have to fill this with substance over and over again as new topics arise like climate change and global warming.

Interconnected multipolarity

In a very long-term anthropological perspective on the balance of power on the globe, the period that mankind lived on this globe has been characterised by an unconnected multipolarity. People lived in their more or less isolated communities before the Egyptian, Roman, Chinese, Australian, African or Japanese empires and people of the world became connected through new means of transport and communication networks.
In the 21st century the world wide web has broad us closer together and suddenly we realize that unipolarity or bipolarity might be options again through the unipolar dominance in airspace and radio frequencies. Even if unconnected multipolarity has been by far the longest period of mankind, the new developments in international politics resemble more a world of interconnected multipolarity than an American dominated unipolar or bipolar world of the Cold War period until the collapse of the Soviet Union. Stephen Walt (2026) and Raja Mohan (2026) discuss the concept of multipolarity in the same issue of Foreign Affairs (Vol. 105 Nr.2). Whereas Walt emphasises the USA as a “predatory hegemon”, Mohan describes the USA as being tempted and actually currently going it alone in international politics.
The current military image of world politics seems to be dominated by unipolarity again, maybe just before the longer run realities of economic, demographic, financial, trade and productivity developments, already reflected already in such data, take the upper hand again. The spectrum of the unipolar, bipolar, multipolar world privots around multipolarity in the long run, even if bipolar or unipolar intermezzi are part of the historical evolution.
(Image: view of Obzorno-geografceskij globus, Moskau 1994, Stabi Berlin 2026-1)