THE “G3 FORESIGHT FORUM” AS AN ESTABLISHED INSTITUTION

We are pleased to announce today the establishment of the Conference on Geopolitics, Geostrategy, and Geoeconomics (Geo3), which was initially launched by the “Alexandros Papannastasiou Institute (INAP)” exactly one year ago. Subsequently, the following two conferences were co-organized in collaboration with other reputable scientific institutes, universities, and think tanks.

Our ambition is for the conference to become an established institution, held annually at an international cooperative level with institutions, scientific institutes, universities, and think tanks on related topics (Geo3) from across Greece, Cyprus, and abroad.

We can confidently say that it has now become a reputable institution following the three successful conferences held in Athens, Alexandroupoli-Thessaloniki, and Athens again, with active participation from exceptional political, scientific, academic, diplomatic, and administrative/strategic/military personnel from both our country and other nations. The organizations that co-organized any of the three conferences are as follows:

Alexandros Papannastasiou Institute (INAP) – Panteion University – ELISME (Hellenic Center for Strategic Studies) - Acropolis Excellence Center (COE Acropolis) - STRATEGY INTERNATIONAL (SI) - GENEVA CENTRE FOR SECURITY POLICY (GCSP) - Hellenic Society of Geographical Studies “STRABO” - Thucydides Institute for Research and Study, “MONEY SHOW”.

THE 5 INNOVATIONS IMPLEMENTED IN THE CONFERENCES

For a more comprehensive and substantive examination of the issues, and considering the demands of dynamic dialogues on Geo3 topics, defense, and foreign policy that concern our country—especially regarding the concept of foresight—a number of innovations were implemented during the meetings.

The five innovations that have been applied thus far are the first in a series designed to address the demanding dialectical nature of the conference, particularly in terms of foresight:

1. “Meetings with In-depth Examination of Issues and Dialectical Debate”: This involves roundtable discussions with interdisciplinary participation (6 to 8 participants) focused on specific questions and strictly limited invited audiences.

2. “Application of the Chatham House Rule”: Discussions are conducted freely without political considerations, rigid political correctness, or conditional falsehoods. Positions, counterarguments, and their synthesis from the dialectical process are recorded in the conclusions, but it is not disclosed who made them.

3. “Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a Conference Participant”: In the second and third conferences (Thessaloniki and Athens), this method was piloted for the first time, with impressive results. AI was integrated into the discussions as a participant at the dialogue table, providing answers to suitably submitted questions. The use of AI allows us to explore its limits and how it could serve as a creative tool for human thought on applied issues. Over time, given that many worldwide seek answers from AI, its responses will serve as immediate evidence of how it influences the opinions of those questioning it on similar national interest topics.

4. “Oxford Style Debate”: In the roundtable meetings, the “Oxford Style Debate” method was adopted, primarily as a tool for synthesizing/constructing positions rather than as an educational tool. The dialectical examination of critical questions and applied policy options is conducted by representatives of different schools of thought.