India and the Global AI Race - A Call for Strategic, Democratic Governance
July 12, 2025

Context:

  • As the United States and China spearhead a new age of Artificial Intelligence (AI) competition and the European Union asserts regulatory leadership, India has announced its ambition to become a major player in global AI governance.
  • However, without a robust, politically anchored national AI strategy, India's efforts risk fragmentation and global irrelevance, particularly as global governance norms around AI solidify.

India’s Global AI Ambition vs Domestic Strategic Deficit:

  • India’s strategic position: India seeks to represent the Global South in AI forums by leveraging -
    • Democratic legitimacy
    • Digital capabilities
    • Leadership in the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI)
  • The governance gap: IndiaAI Mission (with a budget outlay of Rs. 10,000 crore) is operational but -
    • It lacks a cabinet-endorsed national strategy.
    • It is housed as a division of a Section 8 company in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), and is led by a bureaucrat.
    • Operates with limited political mandate or coordination authority.
  • Comparison with global peers: US, China, UK, and EU have formal AI strategies with roadmaps, timelines, and institutional backing.

Structural Challenges in India’s AI Ecosystem:

  • Research and talent deficit:
    • Weak R&D base and limited AI-specialised PhDs.
    • Indian universities underperform in global AI rankings.
    • Poor academia-industry collaboration.
    • Brain drain of top-tier talent to global AI hubs.
  • Private sector limitations:
    • The IT sector focused on services, not innovation.
    • Low investment in foundational AI research.
    • Absence of AI-first national champions.
    • Venture capital flows focused on consumer tech, not deep-tech innovation.

Democratic and Institutional Shortcomings in AI Governance:

  • Parliamentary exclusion:
    • No bipartisan consensus on AI.
    • Less than 1% of parliamentary questions on AI.
    • Absence of institutional oversight mechanisms.
    • Lack of parliamentary involvement undermines policy legitimacy, governance continuity, and public trust.
  • Technocratic policy discourse: The mostly technocratic policy talks have given little attention to crucial questions like strategic autonomy, the use of public data, energy demands, and national security consequences.

Consequences for India's Global AI Credibility:

  • Disconnect between global aspirations and domestic governance, as India's international ambition is undercut by fragmented domestic policies.
  • Democracies worldwide watch for alignment between India’s internal governance and external leadership claims.

Way Forward - A Democratic and Strategic AI Framework:

  • Cabinet-endorsed national AI strategy: Actionable roadmap and vision aligned with economic, security, and industrial policies and presented to Parliament for legitimacy.
  • Empowered coordinating authority: With a whole-of-government mandate and institutional mechanisms for democratic accountability.
  • Parliamentary oversight:
    • Establishment of dedicated standing committees on AI.
    • Bipartisan deliberation to ensure long-term policy stability.
  • Public engagement: Transparent debate on ethical, social, and strategic implications.

Conclusion - AI as a National Strategic Imperative:

  • AI is not just a technology — it is a general-purpose transformation impacting national security, economic development, social equity and governance.
  • India’s young population, digital infrastructure, and democratic framework offer unique advantages.
  • But without strategic coherence and democratic anchoring, India risks losing its window to shape global AI norms.

Enquire Now