India’s Role In The US-China AI Race And AI Governance

Source: Indian Express
GS II: International Relations, Bilateral Relations, Global Groupings and Agreements, GS III: Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity, Indigenization of Technology, National Security

Why in the News?

The growing competition between the United States and China in Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly in advanced AI models, semiconductors and technological standards, has raised concerns about India’s technological dependence and strategic autonomy.

News in Brief

• The US and China have initiated discussions on AI-related risks, focusing on advanced AI systems and their national security implications.
• The dialogue seeks to establish communication channels for reporting AI incidents and addressing potential security threats.
• Differences persist over the scope of AI safety, with the US emphasizing frontier AI risks and China advocating broader technological cooperation.
• The developments highlight India’s need to balance international AI partnerships with domestic technological development and independent policymaking.

Key Highlights

US-China AI Competition: From Cooperation to Strategic Rivalry

• The US and China are competing to establish technological leadership in AI, with implications for economic growth, military security and global influence.
  • In September 2026, the two countries initiated discussions on AI following concerns over incidents involving advanced AI systems in American laboratories.
  • Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei’s call to “pace the frontier” brought AI safety into the international policy debate.
  • The US–China dialogue on AI risks provides a channel for discussing incidents, sharing information and preventing misunderstandings.
  • The framework was laid in New York on September 20, with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng leading the first round of AI discussions within their trade mechanism.
  • Washington proposed a channel to notify incidents with national security consequences, although the two countries differ on what should be covered.
• The central disagreement is whether AI governance should focus on advanced or super intelligent AI systems or on artificial intelligence more broadly.

Divergent Approaches of the United States and China

United States

• The US approach emphasizes frontier AI safety, national security and restrictions on China’s access to advanced semiconductor technologies.
• The Trump administration has focused on maintaining American technological leadership and preventing sensitive AI capabilities from reaching strategic competitors.
• Washington seeks to protect its AI ecosystem through export controls, technological partnerships and coordination with trusted countries.

China

• China considers AI a central component of its technological development and strategic competition with the United States.
• President Xi Jinping has called for countries to build on their respective strengths rather than engage in confrontation.
• China is promoting open-source AI models and broader technological cooperation through platforms such as BRICS.
• Chinese AI developers are expanding their presence globally, with countries such as Singapore, Malaysia and Brazil adopting Chinese models or related technologies.

The competition is not limited to developing more powerful AI models. It also involves control over chips, computing infrastructure, datasets, technological standards and access to global markets.

AI Governance and National Security Concerns

• AI systems are increasingly relevant to military operations, critical infrastructure, intelligence and national security.
  • Advanced AI systems can create risks when deployed without adequate human oversight, particularly in military and nuclear decision-making.
  • In November 2024, US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping affirmed the need to maintain human control over decisions concerning the use of nuclear weapons.
  • However, the understanding was not formalized into a treaty, and the September 2026 discussions did not establish a common framework covering all AI-related risks.
  • The two countries also differ on the scope of AI safety, the regulation of advanced models and the extent of government oversight.
• AI governance therefore requires international communication, appropriate safeguards and clearly defined human accountability, particularly where automated systems may affect national security.

India’s Position in the US-China AI Race

• India must navigate the competition without becoming dependent on either country’s technological ecosystem.
• Its long-term position will depend on building domestic capabilities and maintaining the ability to make independent technological choices.

Three Major Concerns for India

• AI Governance and strategic security
  • India needs a governance framework that allows technological innovation while protecting national security and public interests.
  • Rules governing frontier AI may be influenced by the US and China, which possess significant technological capabilities.
  • India must ensure that its AI policies reflect domestic priorities and are not determined entirely by the standards of competing powers.
  • Nuclear command and control, military applications and critical infrastructure require strict safeguards and meaningful human oversight.
• Competing technological ecosystems
  • The global AI ecosystems is increasingly divided between competing technological standards and supply chains.
  • The US expects trusted partners to maintain a technological ecosystem that is less dependent on China.
  • China is promoting its own AI models, open-source platforms and international cooperation through BRICS and other forums.
  • India must avoid becoming locked into a single technological ecosystem and preserve access to multiple sources of technology.
  • The proposed open-source AI community within BRICS, discussed at the summit in Rio, reflects China’s effort to promote cooperation through alternative platforms.
  • India must assess such initiatives according to its technological and strategic interests.
• Dependence on foreign AI technology
  • India’s reliance on imported semiconductors, computing infrastructure and advanced AI models creates vulnerabilities.
  • Dependence on foreign technology can expose India to export restrictions, supply-chain disruptions and sudden changes in access.
  • The withdrawal of access to advanced American AI models or computing resources could affect domestic research and innovation.
  • Reliance on imported systems may also create concerns regarding data security, technological sovereignty and control over critical infrastructure.
  • India needs to develop indigenous capabilities while continuing to benefit from international cooperation and technological partnerships.

Way Forward: Building India’s AI capabilities

India’s response should focus on five interrelated priorities.

• Welcome US-China AI cooperation while protecting India’s interests
  • India should support practical cooperation between the US and China on AI safety and risk reduction.
  • Encourage mechanisms for incident notification, information sharing and crisis communication.
  • Ensure that AI governance discussions include emerging economies and reflect the concerns of countries outside the two major technological powers.
  • Seek inclusive international arrangements rather than allowing AI standards to be shaped exclusively by the US and China.
• Establish human-centred AI governance
  • India should develop a governance framework that balances innovation, public welfare and security.
  • Maintain meaningful human oversight over AI applications in nuclear command, military operations and other high-risk areas.
  • Require appropriate safety testing, risk assessment and accountability for frontier AI systems.
  • Adopt a risk-based approach that distinguishes high-risk applications from routine and low-risk uses of AI.
  • The objective should be to ensure that technological advancement remains consistent with human control, constitutional values and national security.
• Building domestic computing and semiconductor capabilities
  • India should reduce excessive dependence on foreign technological infrastructure.
  • Expand domestic computing capacity, semiconductor manufacturing and access to advanced chips.
  • Strengthen indigenous AI models, datasets, research facilities and supporting digital infrastructure.
  • Invest in skilled human resources, research and development, and collaboration between academic institutions, startups and industry.
  • Domestic capability will allow India to negotiate international partnerships from a position of greater technological independence.
• Diversify technology partnerships
  • India should maintain cooperation with different countries while avoiding excessive dependence on any single supplier.
  • Continue mutually beneficial technology partnerships with the United States and other trusted partners.
  • Evaluate access to Chinese AI models and technologies based on security, data protection and national interests.
  • Develop alternative sources of computing, chips, software and AI applications to reduce supply-chain vulnerabilities.
  • The focus should be on securing reliable access to technology while retaining the ability to switch suppliers and systems when required.
• Promote an independent and inclusive AI framework
  • India should use platforms such as BRICS and multilateral institutions to contribute to global AI governance.
  • Support open, inclusive and technology-neutral standards that enable developing countries to participate in AI development.
  • Promote cooperation in AI research, capacity-building, digital infrastructure and safe technological innovation.
  • Advocate equitable access to AI resources and greater participation of the Global South in setting international standards.
  • India’s approach should combine technological self-reliance with international engagement, rather than treating the two as competing objectives.

Conclusion

India’s approach to the US-China AI race must combine technological self-reliance with international cooperation. Strengthening indigenous AI capabilities, ensuring responsible governance and diversifying technology partnerships will be essential to safeguarding strategic autonomy and advancing India’s vision of Viksit Bharat 2047.

UPSC Prelims and Mains Practice Question

With reference to Artificial Intelligence and India’s technological autonomy, consider the following statements:

1. Strategic autonomy in AI requires a country to completely discontinue all foreign technological partnerships.
2. Frontier AI systems can raise concerns relating to national security, critical infrastructure and human oversight.
3. Semiconductor manufacturing and domestic computing infrastructure can contribute to technological sovereignty.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 and 3 only

(c) 1 and 3 only

(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only

Mains Practice Question

Q) Examine the implications of the US-China competition in Artificial Intelligence for India’s strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty. Discuss the measures required to strengthen India’s indigenous AI capabilities and ensure national security. (250 words)

Daily Current Affairs: Click Here

Rate this Article and Leave Feedback