As artificial intelligence stands out as a decisive factor in military operations, a strategic fracture line emerges: that which opposes the generic models developed by global commercial actorsoften North Americans, to sovereign systems, designed locally for critical and secure uses. This technological tension, already visible in the civilian field, becomes central in debates on strategic autonomy, the security of sensitive data, and operational reliability.
Sovereignty as a strategic imperative
In the defense field, confidence is not decreed. It is built on controlled infrastructure, transparent models, and an ability to audit each critical line of the process. For armies, Using an AI which is neither controlled training, data nor behavior in the event of operational stress is a major risk.
France, through theMinisterial Agency for Artificial Defense Intelligence (AMIAD)has noted the need for closed systems, trained on sensitive data hosted in secure military clouds. The goal is to ensure that the AI used to identify a target, guide a shot or analyze a threat, cannot be influenced or compromised by an external actor, voluntarily or not.
The limits of generics for dual use
The major foundation models (LLMS), developed by Openai, Google, Anthropic or Mistral, are based on general data corpora, trained worldwide. Their power is undeniable. But in a military context, these models present several Critical risks ::
- Opacity of reasoning : These models work like black boxes. However, a military decision requires traceability and explanability.
- Structural dependence : Updates are operated by the publisher, according to his rules, his calendar, and his political choices. Real control escapes the end user.
- Risk of cutting : In the event of geopolitical tension, a foreign supplier may suspend its services or limit its sensitive uses.
- Data pollution : Training on open data exposes to biases, flaws, or upstream manipulations.
Building an AI of trust: security, specificity, auditability
A sovereign AI, conversely, is based on three pillars:
- Total value chain control : from the choice of architecture to training mode, including accommodation.
- Training on classified or high value added data : produced by intelligence services, arms systems or secure partners.
- Continuous audit capacity : to detect any drift, bias or alteration of the behavior of the model.
This AI is not intended to beat the commercial models in gross performance. She targets a operational robustness, behavioral stability, and strategic reliability.
Interoperability and Coalition: Confidence as a collaboration factor
Modern military operations are rarely national. They are part of coalitions. Sharing AI systems involves sharing trust criteria.
A German AI used on a French frigate, a Spanish model integrated into a NATO operation: so many cases that require common standards, shared certificationsand cross -checking mechanisms. This need for consistency strengthens the pressure on states to develop compatible, but controlled models.
The real danger: losing control of foundations
As Eric Salobir, President of Human Technology Foundation recalled, Whoever controls the foundation models controls the base of the AI pyramid. Europe is a strategic delay on generic models. But in the defense, it can compensate with a reverse logic: Create specialized models, reduced but robust, natively sovereign, and auditable.
This strategy involves reviewing supply processes, prioritizing investment in secure infrastructure, and promoting long -term partnerships between armies, industries and national laboratories.
Performance is not enough, it is necessary to master
In the military field, Technological superiority cannot be built on systems whose foundations are not controlled. The illusion of an all-terrain AI, available online, without political or strategic cost, is incompatible with the requirements of modern war. The battle of confidence is not gained from the power of calculation, but to the ability to explain, to master, and to assume what the machine does – especially when it decides in the place of man.
