Between the contrasting positions taken by the US and the European Union on their respective AI missions at the recent global summit and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s advocacy for the global South, Anvitii Rai examines what the global AI scene looks like, and where India stands
What happened at the AI summit in Paris?
The global AI Action Summit was held in Paris and was the third gathering of its kind, after the Buckinghamshire and Seoul editions. This time, discussions centred around five key themes—public interest AI, jobs, investment, ethics, and regulation. Notable attendees included US vice president JD Vance, PM Narendra Modi (who co-chaired the summit along with French President Emmanuel Macron), Chinese vice-premier of the State Council Zhang Guoqing, the CEOs of the three biggest AI companies — OpenAI, DeepMind, and Anthropic — and more. Beyond panels, addresses, and discussions, it was notable that the US and the UK refused to sign a global declaration advocating for an “open, inclusive, and ethical” approach to AI. The declaration, endorsed by 60 countries including India, France, Germany and China, called for global governance on AI.
Meanwhile, PM Modi announced that the next iteration of the summit would be held in India, and that India supported the decision to establish the AI Foundation and the Council for Sustainable AI.
Power struggle at the centre of divergent views
The potential of generative AI (GenAI) reached global discourse after the release of the Chat GPT large language model (LLM) in 2022. The hype around AI has powered a huge flow of capital into equities, inflating valuations and lifting stock markets to record highs, leading to an increase of around $10 trillion in the market value of the “Magnificent Seven” companies since 2022. As of now, the US is on top of the list of countries with notable LLMs at 61 as of 2023, according to the World Economic Forum data. It is followed by China (15), but the gap is huge between the US and the rest of the world. The entry of China’s DeepSeek AI chatbot has also intensified the competitive rivalry between China and the US, which has led AI breakthroughs. Time reported on the same, “The summit laid bare a global power struggle over AI—Europe wants strict rules and public funding, China is expanding state-backed AI, and the US is going all-in on a free-market approach.”
Global governance of AI as a goal
GenAI revolutionised the AI landscape, and its myriad applications opened the gates to fear and apprehension that extended to discussions about national security and data protection. Seeing the vast potential of AI and its universality, the current global scenario reveals a tug of war. With leaders not in agreement over AI regulations, a divide is created which is not being bridged to ensure that AI adoption is equitable. In such a scenario, beyond regional laws, a global vision for something as disruptive and dynamic as AI would be helpful. The New York Times described the current iteration of the Global AI Summit as “watching policymakers on horseback, struggling to install seatbelts on a passing Lamborghini.”
On the one hand, AI is a competitive industry, and on the other hand, it is a disruptive force. Complex as it is, some global framework is desired so that its advantages are enjoyed and its risks are mitigated.
Where do the US & the EU stand?
The two stalwarts in the AI arena happen to have radically opposite views on regulating AI. This was understood through their representatives’ respective addresses at the summit. US VP Vance, in his address, declared the US as the “leader in AI”, and the current administration would ensure that “American AI technology continues to be the gold standard worldwide.” Simultaneously, he also put the EU to question and noted that foreign governments were “tightening the screws” on US tech firms. He argued that AI was akin to past industrial revolutions, and the US could maintain its competitive edge by ensuring the least government intervention.
On the other side, European Council president Ursula von der Layen underscored that “AI needs the confidence of the people and has to be safe”, justifying the bloc’s AI Act that is set to take effect in phases next year.
What is India’s position?
For all its tech talent, India does not have a notable LLM yet, even as indigenous models do exist, with few available for public use (such as Krutrim). Per a 2024 study on Indian AI regulation by Carnegie, the biggest obstacle to a comprehensive policy framework in India is the lack of cohesion for the vision of AI between separate factions of the government, industry, and civil society. It says there is apprehension regarding laws stifling innovation in AI. To even position itself within the AI race, a comprehensive policy is needed to chart the course for Indian AI operations that takes a middle route between the US and the EU approaches. To do so, the govern-ment must take the apprehensions of concerned stakeholders and ensure that the momentum it set with the Rs 10,500 crore National AI Mission is continued by the private sector, so that Indian AI achieves the scale that it requires. The advent of DeepSeek has shown that it is possible for India to start its AI journey on its own terms.
