Pulse: AI and Arab Identity

This Pulse survey, conducted in November 2025, explores public attitudes toward AI in Arab societies, with a particular focus on reliance on foreign AI models and their impact on Arab values and identity. The findings highlight growing concerns about how AI systems may influence cultural norms, shape collective identity, and redefine societal priorities. By examining perceptions of the need for Arab-developed AI and views on who should lead its development, the survey offers insight into how technological dependence is increasingly understood as a strategic, cultural, and identity-related issue across the Arab world.

Respondents were first asked whether Arab societies rely on foreign AI models. Notably, although a “not at all” option existed, none of the participants selected it. Instead, respondents were split between partial and full reliance: 68% believe Arab societies are partially dependent on foreign AI models, while 32% view this reliance as full. The distinction between full and partial reliance may also reflect how people percieve the use of AI, not only which models they use. For instance, “partial” reliance may refer to using foreign models but interacting with them in Arabic or through localized interfaces.

A clear majority, 73%, believe that AI models influence Arab values, while 27% see no such impact. Respondents may be considering a wide spectrum of values, linguistic, cultural, religious, ethical, or intellectual. The concern appears less about the foreign origin of AI models and more about AI’s potential to reshape social and cultural norms. This sentiment may also reflect a broader hesitation toward unfamiliar technologies. In this case, AI represents the “unknown,” and its implications for Arab values remain a source of anticipation and anxiety.

While a majority of respondents believe that AI models do affect Arab values, the nature of this impact remains uncertain. 55% of respondents classified the impact as neutral, which in this context should not be interpreted as an absence of influence. Rather, “neutral” reflects the view that AI’s effect on Arab values is neither clearly positive nor clearly negative at this stage. This interpretation aligns with the structure of the survey itself: the preceding question establishes that an impact exists, while this follow-up question probes how that impact is perceived. The predominance of neutrality therefore suggests uncertainty and caution, rather than denial of influence.

At the same time, the distribution of responses reveals a noticeable tilt toward concern. 36% perceive the impact as negative, compared to only 9% who view it as positive. This imbalance indicates that although many respondents are unsure about the direction of AI’s influence, those who do hold a defined view are more likely to anticipate adverse consequences for Arab values. Taken together, these findings suggest that AI is widely seen as a transformative force whose cultural implications are still unfolding prompting hesitation.

The responses regarding identity closely mirror those about values, which is unsurprising given the conceptual proximity and overlap between the two. However, perceived influence on identity is slightly lower: 68% believe AI can influence Arab identity, while 32% do not. This difference may stem from the fact that identity is often understood as more profound and enduring than values, making respondents somewhat less convinced that AI can reshape it.

Perceptions of the impact on identity also resemble those concerning values. 50% expect a neutral impact, with opinions on positive (23%) and negative (27%) effects closely aligned. These balanced percentages suggest that public opinion around AI and identity is still forming. As AI becomes more integrated into daily life, clearer attitudes may eventually emerge.

Despite divided views on impact, an overwhelming 82% believe there is a need for an indigenous Arab AI model. An additional 14% selected “maybe,” indicating openness to the idea. Only 4.5% do not consider it necessary. This near-consensus shows broad support for investing in AI technologies rooted in Arab linguistic, cultural, and social contexts.

When respondents were asked who should be responsible for developing Arab-made AI models, researchers received the highest share at 45%, followed closely by governments at 36%. The preference for researchers suggests that AI is widely perceived as a highly specialized and technically complex field, one that requires leadership from those with scientific expertise and domain knowledge. At the same time, the strong role attributed to governments may reflect expectations around regulation, oversight, and long-term strategic coordination. In contrast, civil society organizations received only 4.5%, indicating their limited perceived role in shaping AI development within the Arab world. This likely reflects the relatively weak institutional presence and influence of civil society in policymaking processes across the region. The remaining responses fell under the category of “other,” suggesting some openness to alternative actors.

PULSE is a data-driven series that visualizes public sentiment on trending regional and global issues, curated and edited by the Al Habtoor Research Centre Early Warning Programme’s Senior Researchers Habiba Diaaeldin and Ahmed El Saeid.

The findings presented are based on data collected through social media polls and online forms distributed via email. While efforts are made to ensure a broad and diverse sample, the results reflect the views and opinions of respondents and should not be interpreted as representative of the entire population or Al Habtoor Research Centre.