aiqbench analysis
This research demonstrates how geopolitical biases embedded in training data cause major LLMs to generate politically skewed responses depending on the language used, effectively mirroring global political divisions regarding the war in Ukraine. The study reveals a critical vulnerability where information warfare can directly influence AI outputs, spreading specific geopolitical narratives based on linguistic context rather than factual neutrality. This finding underscores the urgent need for robust alignment strategies that decouple model responses from the cultural and political biases inherent in their training corpora.
Geopolitical Divisions Across Languages in Large Language Models
arXiv:2609.20005v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: People increasingly turn to AI chatbots for news and explanations of world events. But do they receive the same political answers when they ask in different languages? Here we show that the language of a question can change how the same AI systems assess the war in Ukraine. We ask GPT, Claude and Gemini to evaluate twenty statements about the war in 112 languages, collecting 67,200 responses. The balance between Russia-leaning and Ukraine-leaning responses differs across languages. When we group responses by countries' official languages, they follow a pattern resembling worldwide political divisions: relatively more Russia-leaning answers correspond to more favourable public views of Russia, less support for Ukraine in United Nations votes, and less aid to Ukraine. The broad pattern recurs across all three models and remains when individual statement pairs are removed. Our findings suggest a possible route through which information warfare may shape the text used to train AI models, which may in turn spread geopolitical biases.
Abstract:People increasingly turn to AI chatbots for news and explanations of world events. But do they receive the same political answers when they ask in different languages? Here we show that the language of a question can change how the same AI systems assess the war in Ukraine. We ask GPT, Claude and Gemini to evaluate twenty statements about the war in 112 languages, collecting 67,200 responses. The balance between Russia-leaning and Ukraine-leaning responses differs across languages. When we group responses by countries' official languages, they follow a pattern resembling worldwide political divisions: relatively more Russia-leaning answers correspond to more favourable public views of Russia, less support for Ukraine in United Nations votes, and less aid to Ukraine. The broad pattern recurs across all three models and remains when individual statement pairs are removed. Our findings suggest a possible route through which information warfare may shape the text used to train AI models, which may in turn spread geopolitical biases.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
arXiv:2609.20005 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.20005v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.20005 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 262 words
Related coverage

Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · Sep 27, 2026
Assessing Information Ecosystems : How Governments Can Get Ahead of Hybrid Threats
carnegieendowment.org · Aug 5, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026
Lock-In Risk Needs More Researchers; Here's Where to Start
LessWrong · Jun 17, 2026