Questão nº 133
Questão de Língua Inglesa · CEBRASPE IRBR 2025 (nº 133)
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. Rather than embracing AI as a magic wand, it must be approached as a double-edged sword that is capable of assisting, but never replacing the unique human skills that diplomacy demands.
Judge the following items based on the ideas presented in the preceding text, as well as on its linguistic aspects.
The text suggests that, although AI can assist diplomats, it cannot fully replace the human qualities required in diplomacy.
Resposta comentada
A ideia central do texto é que a IA pode ajudar o diplomata (eficiência, informação, ferramentas estratégicas), mas não substitui o que é tipicamente humano na diplomacia: julgamento, sensibilidade política, cultura e inteligência emocional. O autor fecha dizendo que a IA é uma "faca de dois gumes" que assiste, mas nunca substitui as habilidades humanas.
- Correta: Certo. O texto afirma explicitamente que a IA deve augment (ampliar) e não automate (automatizar) a diplomacia, e que ela nunca deve replace (substituir) as habilidades humanas únicas — exatamente o que o item diz.
Fica de olho: A banca costuma trocar verbos de grau — transformar "cannot fully replace" (não substitui plenamente) em algo absoluto como "AI can replace human diplomats in most negotiations" ou "AI is useless to diplomacy". Os dois extremos estão errados: o texto defende o meio-termo (IA complementa, humano decide). Sempre volte ao texto e procure os verbos-chave: assist, augment, enhance (lado positivo) versus replace, automate (o que a IA não deve fazer).
Fonte: CEBRASPE IRBR 2025 Diplomata (Terceiro Secretário). Reproduzida para fins de estudo.