The inauguration of Donald Trump for a second term as President of the United States (US) brings substantial implications for the tech industry, particularly in areas such as Big Tech, Artificial Intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, and private sector innovations. During his previous tenure, President Trump advanced policies that significantly shaped the tech landscape, including a focus on social media platforms to address perceived biases, introduction of the U.S. Space Force, and initiatives to strengthen the US’s global technological leadership. Furthermore, collaboration between Trump and key tech leaders, such as Elon Musk, signals a direct ingress of the private sector in public policy domain. Musk’s leadership of SpaceX, Tesla, and X (formerly Twitter) alongside his alliance with the Trump administration, is poised to reshape the landscape of tech policies, with implications for US innovation, defence, and foreign policy. Trump’s proposed ‘Digital Bill of Rights’ and his critique of tech monopolies could have major ripple effects across global technology sectors, like AI, data privacy, and content moderation. At the same time, Trump Administration’s drive to bolster US technological and industrial capabilities could lead to new innovations while raising concerns about the future trends of emerging technologies, including AI, quantum computing, and renewable energy. In an effort to explore the multidimensional implications of Trump’s second presidency on the tech industry, the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, organised a roundtable on ‘Trump-Tech Nexus: Opportunities and Challenges Ahead’ on 29 January 2025. This RTC focused on forward-looking insights on the following questions: How will Trump’s tech policies influence the US position in the global technology race and tech market? How will Trump’s ‘Digital Bill of Rights’ impact Big Tech’s content moderation practices and accountability? What opportunities and risks does Trump’s focus on the tech industry present for the global community? What are the potential implications of Trump’s tech-focused policies for US diplomatic relations? Does Pakistan stand to benefit from the tech policies of US under Trump 2.0? The distinguished speakers included Ambassador Zamir Akram, Air Vice Marshal Soban Nazir Syed (Retd), and Talha Bin Afzal. The discussion was moderated by Mustafa Bilal, Research Assistant at CASS with Concluding Remarks by President CASS Air Marshal Javaid Ahmed (Retd).
Share this article
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
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.
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.
