08. Shaza Arif-AI-Act-Sum-Oped thumbnail-Feb-2025-AP

The recent Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit held in Paris has once again underscored the AI-related agendas that have seized the global discourse.  Co-hosted by France and India, the summit has stirred renewed hype in the tech community. The summit aimed to increase AI accessibility while ensuring that the use of AI remains transparent, safe, secure and trustworthy. In addition, bridging the global digital divide by promoting sustainable AI and empowering both developed and developing states was also a key objective.

To be fair, the summit concluded on a mixed note. While the event was successful in stirring discussion on a pressing subject globally, the refusal of the United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US) to sign the proposed summit agreement was the highlight of the event. The development comes with notable implications and questions on the future of AI governance. The UK and US have actively advocated for AI safety – in fact, the UK hosted the first Global AI Summit in 2023. The recent event reflects recalibration of priorities, with emerging conflicts of national and multilateral commitments.

While the divergent goals blur the path towards AI regulations, they also highlight the geopolitical struggle over technological dominance. Once dominated by US and Western states, there is a notable shift in the monopoly of cutting-edge technologies with the advent of new states and actors, with China being the most important player in this regard. China’s AI initiatives, which have unfolded recently, have certainly rung alarm bells in its Western counterparts.

The timing of the summit also coincided with the launch of DeepSeek. The Chinese startup has been in the headlines ever since its launch. The astounding reasoning capacity of the model and the relatively lower cost compared to the American models have undoubtedly sent shockwaves across the industry. The immediate impact of the development was imminent, with Nvidia losing nearly USD 600 billion in market capitalisation shortly after. Subsequently, DeepSeek was banned in Taiwan, South Korea, and Australia, primarily for employees in the government sector. Other countries, including the US are also expected to follow suit due to growing security concerns

In the technological realm, China is challenging the Western stronghold in AI-driven industries, a forte of the Western private sector in innovative ways. A recent example in this case is the announcement of BYD offering autopilot features in nearly all of its cars for free. Approximately 21 models, including the Seagull Hatchback, which is priced as low as CNY 69,800  would be equipped with autonomous navigation and self-parking abilities, enabling a new era of intelligent driving with increased accessibility of autonomous driving. Such innovations will likely force Western automobile companies, who have been at the forefront of autonomous driving such as Tesla to rethink their market approach. An added implication is that the reduced cost has also raised optimism regarding states that fall short on financial investment in AI to still make advancements in the frontier via advanced data training techniques. Resultantly, China has shattered the myth of expensive AI, unfolding easier access to the masses. By actively participating in a global forum for AI, China is establishing a strong foothold in AI and its potential governance in future, marking a notable gain on the diplomatic front.

Developments at the AI Action Summit reflect that the optimistic vision of the technology is drawing more attention, taking edge over safety concerns. It is likely that the technological race will only accelerate in future with more states moving towards AI integration. Hence, the global governance of AI is likely to remain fragmented in the near future. The episode has also put the remaining European states at a problematic stop, given that the region had made notable progress in data privacy laws and regulations. The recent developments may ring alarms regarding the future trajectory of the establishment of AI regulations and subsequent adherence to the rules in the region. The concerns are further compounded by the impending advent of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI), which will likely add to the existing challenges.

As far as India is concerned, the recent episode highlights India’s growing tech ambitions. By co-chairing the summit with France, India wants to carve out its essential role in future AI governance, putting itself as a major player in emerging technologies. Despite signing multiple agreements under the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET) with the US, collaboration with France and other European states, the partnership shows a balanced approach vis-a-vis the technological realm – avoiding overreliance in one bloc. This also allows for attracting expertise and investments from different regions. Likewise, such platforms can help India to expand its AI ecosystem via increased collaboration with other global leaders to overcome domestic infrastructure and regulatory gaps. Nevertheless, the UK and US’s cautious approach has been a significant setback for India, limiting the feasibility of unified global governance and impeding progress in this domain.

The global AI landscape is marked by politicisation of technology, the impact of which is likely to be profound in future. The ongoing developments suggest that AI governance is not solely a technological issue; its scope extends to geopolitics, global economy, and society. The global governance of technology will remain dependent on how nations balance national interests and global cooperation. The choices made today will significantly influence generations to come. Lastly, amidst such developments, Pakistan needs to actively follow the ongoing trends, engage with international community and chalk out its role in the technological realm.

Shaza Arif is a Research Associate at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. The Article was initially published in The News International. She can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »