"Best of Both Sides: Don’t wait for consensus on AI governance"
Frontier AI
highly capable AI models at the cutting edge of capability, posing systemic risk potential.
WAICO
China-initiated, Shanghai-headquartered intergovernmental body for global AI standard-setting, open to all countries.
AI governance has evolved through a sequence of international summits that reveal deep disagreement over whether frontier AI should be regulated by binding rules or voluntary industry commitments. The Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit (2023) and the Seoul AI Summit (2024) established an early template of non-binding safety commitments. The Paris AI Action Summit (2025), co-chaired with India, extended this process but exposed a major fracture: the US and the UK declined to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI, while most other participants did. India later hosted the AI Impact Summit (2026) in New Delhi, built around themes of democratising AI resources and secure, trusted AI, signalling India's ambition to help set the agenda rather than simply follow it.
Domestically, India's governance architecture for digital technologies remains limited. The IT Rules, 2021 created an early template for platform accountability for intermediaries, but no comparable statutory framework yet exists specifically for frontier AI systems capable of autonomously planning and executing multi-step tasks. This gap has grown more urgent because frontier AI models are deployed at scale in India even though their development remains concentrated in a handful of countries.
Three distinct governance philosophies now compete for primacy. The first is industry self-regulation, seen in the recent Accord on Super Intelligence signed by leading AI companies at the White House. It is described as 'morally binding' rather than legally binding. It calls for internal controls, independent external evaluation, and board-level oversight committees, but it specifies no concrete standards or enforcement mechanisms, leaving compliance to each company's own discretion.
The second philosophy is coordinated state-led regulation. This is represented by the Finland-Norway initiated 'Call for Control of Frontier AI Models', now endorsed by 28 countries. …
Consider the following statements regarding the AI Action Summit held in Grand Palais, Paris in February 2025:
I.Co-chaired with India, the event builds on the advances made at the Bletchley Park Summit held in 2023 and the Seoul Summit held in 2024.
II.Along with other countries, US and UK also signed the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements with respect to the AI Impact Summit, 2026 held in New Delhi:
1.The Summit's intellectual framework was based on three foundational Sutras: People, Planning, and Progress.
2.The Preamble of the Summit stresses Democratising AI Resources, which acknowledges the Charter for Democratic Diffusion of AI as a binding framework to support locally relevant innovation and strengthen resilient AI ecosystems while respecting national laws.
3.The New Delhi Declaration on AI Impact was structured around seven Chakras (Pillars), which included Access for Social Empowerment, AI for Science, and Secure and Trusted AI.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements about the Finland-Norway-led 'Call for Control of Frontier AI Models':
1.It has been endorsed by more than 25 countries.
2.Both the United States and China are among its signatories.
3.Its agenda includes mandatory pre-deployment testing of frontier AI models.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Match the following AI governance initiatives (List I) with their defining characteristic (List II):
List I:
A.Accord on Super Intelligence
B.Call for Control of Frontier AI Models
C.World AI Cooperation Organisation (WAICO)
D.Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence
List II:
1.Voluntary accord by AI companies without specified enforcement standards
2.State-led proposal for mandatory pre-deployment testing, endorsed by 28 countries
3.China-initiated intergovernmental body headquartered in Shanghai with open membership
4.Grouping associated with liberal-democratic and rule-of-law assumptions
Consider the following statements about the World AI Cooperation Organisation (WAICO):
1.It was established in 2026 at the initiative of China.
2.It is headquartered in Shanghai.
3.Membership is restricted to G7 countries.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Consider the following statements about the Accord on Super Intelligence signed at the White House:
1.It was signed by leading AI companies.
2.It specifies legally binding enforcement mechanisms with penalties for non-compliance.
3.It calls for independent external evaluation and oversight by an independent board committee.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Assertion (A): India has a rational basis to support binding international mechanisms such as the Finland-Norway-led call for control of frontier AI.
Reason (R): India is among the leading global developers of frontier AI models and seeks to protect its domestic frontier AI industry from external accountability requirements.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account