Is AI Becoming a Runaway Horse?

Etfa Khurshid-AI-MDS

Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as driving force behind transforming various aspects of our lives from making chores easier to enhancing industrial efficiency. However, as this technological advancement continues to expand at an unprecedented rate, fears of unregulated growth, analogous to a ‘runaway horse’ have emerged.

In order to address such concerns, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) held a first ever meeting on addressing the risks of AI in July 2023. The 15-member Council was briefed on various aspects of AI that pose a threat to international peace. The potential application of AI by non-state entities was one of the major aspects discussed during the meeting that AI can be used to cause instability in the form of ‘3D’ – Destruction, Disinformation or Distress. For example, non-state actors could get easy access to AI-enabled technologies due to commercial availability of AI-enabled technologies, for instance the use of unmanned aerial vehicles or drones. There have been 440 reported cases of non-state actors using drones, according to a 2022 Brookings analysis. Since non-state actors have limited resources as compared to the State, AI-enabled technologies act as a force multiplier and enhance their capabilities to inflict damage.  

Regarding regulation of AI, UN Secretary General AntĂ³nio Guterres proposed that there should be a global watchdog for the regulation, monitoring and enforcement of AI regulations. One cannot deny the significance of UN’s role in AI regulation since it would include perspectives from countries around the world, establishing a norm for AI ethics, guidelines and standards, and ensuring transparency in AI development and deployment. However, such a process could be time taking with countries having different interests and those with influence and power may coerce, cajole and lobby decisions in their own interest.

This is not the first time that concerns regarding AI rapid development haven been raised. In March 2023, leaders from various tech giants in a letter collectively called for pausing powerful AI systems. The letter came after the announcement of ChatGPT-4 and it stated that it called ‘on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This pause should be public and verifiable, and include all key actors. If such a pause cannot be enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium.’ These concerns are centred on the potential risks of increasingly potent AI, including challenges related to misuse, bias, and the incapacity to manage or comprehend such advanced systems.

In addition to that, apprehensions regarding data privacy and monitoring have grown as AI becomes more pervasive in our lives. The ability of AI to process enormous volumes of data prompts alarms about who gets access to it and how it is used, which has the potential to turn it into a tool of oppression and deeper divides between the haves and have-nots.

With the AI market expected to reach USD 407 billion in 2027, and around 67% of the consumers around the world relying on AI tools for information rather than traditional search engines or other means such as books, journals and articles etc., bias and disinformation is one aspect that has raised significant concerns with expanding AI tools. Russian President Putin said ‘Whoever has the best Artificial Intelligence will rule the world’. Imagine the impact these AI tools can create on data bias, public narratives and risk assessments.

While the use of AI in everyday life is becoming increasingly significant, the importance of establishing regulations, addressing bias, protecting privacy, and fostering responsible development needs to be priortised. AI’s potential is vast, but so are the risks if we allow it to sprint unbridled. By steering AI development responsibly, we can harness its development for the betterment of humanity, ensuring a future where AI is a force for good and not a runaway horse trampling on ethical principles or undermining the very fabric of our societal values.

Etfa Khurshid Mirza is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected].

Design Credit: Mysha Dua Salman

Print đŸ–¨ PDF đŸ“„


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

View All Publication

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

Shafaq Zernab May 7, 2026

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

Muhammad Saad May 7, 2026

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

Air Vice Marshal Nasser Ul Haq Wyne(Retd) May 5, 2026

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 »