Interpreting India

This episode is part of our special series on the India AI Impact Summit 2026, examining the conversations, perspectives, and debates that are shaping global AI discourse.

Tino has been in the room at all four AI summits, and his account of how the conversation has evolved is both candid and grounding. Bletchley Park, he says, was about putting AI on the agenda as a matter of global significance. Seoul was about bringing the private sector formally into that conversation. Paris marked a pivot towards economic opportunity, reflecting a growing recognition, particularly in Europe, that being seen only as a regulator was not a position anyone wanted to hold for long. And New Delhi brought something none of the previous summits had: scale, and a genuinely different set of questions. Half a million people attended, and the conversations happening on the floor of the convention center were about crop yields, public service delivery, and what the technology meant for jobs and families. That, Tino says, is not a dilution of the AI safety agenda. It is a necessary part of building one that the rest of the world can actually be part of.

On the criticism that these summits produce declarations that no one enforces and voluntary commitments that companies quietly walk away from, Tino is pragmatic rather than defensive. He points to the eradication of smallpox, the reduction of nuclear weapons, and the Montreal Protocol as reminders that consequential international progress tends to look messy and incremental from the inside. The network of AI safety institutes that now exists across multiple countries, the UN panel on AI, and the fact that frontier labs are taking evaluation and testing seriously at all, are all, in his view, real if incomplete achievements. The harder question, particularly after the U.S. and UK declined to sign the Paris declaration, is whether the summit process can hold its shape as geopolitical competition intensifies and the appetite for multilateral consensus shrinks.

For Geneva, Tino hopes the conversation moves inward, towards understanding how AI is actually changing organizations, families, and daily life at the micro level. He is also candid about risks he thinks are still not being taken seriously enough, particularly around loss of control, pointing to early evidence of models that scheme, misrepresent, and in controlled environments show signs of self-preservation. His overall posture is one of cautious optimism: he does not think the technology should slow down, but he does think the work of aligning it with what is genuinely good for people has barely begun.

Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.
As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.
Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.
Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.

The conversation begins with a close look at India’s data protection regime, particularly the DPDP Act and its emphasis on consent. Nikhil challenges the perception that the law is overly consent-driven, pointing to a range of exemptions and alternative legal bases for processing data. At the same time, he highlights gaps in enforcement and deterrence, arguing that the current framework may struggle to address large-scale misuse of data or systemic harms.

On AI governance, Nikhil makes a case that India does not need a sweeping, EU-style AI law, at least not yet. Given India's legislative pace, enforcement gaps, and how fast AI is evolving, he thinks strengthening existing laws and making targeted amendments is a far more practical path. He does, however, flag artificial intimacy as something that deserves serious attention soon. AI-powered companionship is supercharging the loneliness economy, building emotional dependency at scale, and raising risks that no existing framework is really built to handle.

Closer to home, Nikhil offers a window into how AI is changing legal practice at Trilegal, where 75% of lawyers now use AI in their daily workflows. The firm is simultaneously building AI products, using them internally, and advising clients on AI risk, a position Nikhil sees as an advantage rather than a conflict. For him, the era of lawyers who write code and speak directly with engineers is not something to fear but a long overdue shift in what it means to practice technology law.

Episode Contributors

Nidhi Singh is an associate fellow at Carnegie India. Her current research interests include data governance, artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. Her work focuses on the implications of information technology law and policy from a Global Majority and Asian perspective. She has previously contributed to the Indian Express, The Secretariat, Medianama and HinduBusiness Line.

Nikhil Narendran is a Partner in Trilegal’s Bengaluru office and part of the TMT practice of the firm. He is a subject matter expert in the technology, media, and telecom communication space. Nikhil focuses on the interplay of technology, human lives, and commerce. He has substantial experience in advising companies on telecom, media and technology laws in relation to their entry into India, operations, strategy, policy, regulatory issues, disputes, and business models.

Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.
As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.
Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.
Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.

The conversation begins with a look at where the conflict stands today and how Iran has managed to absorb significant military pressure while still responding in a measured way. Dharmendra explains how the conflict has expanded beyond immediate borders, affecting energy flows and drawing in multiple countries, while also reinforcing a sense of internal unity despite economic strain.

It then turns to Iran’s internal system, where different power centres, from the political leadership to the security establishment, continue to function together even under pressure. The episode also reflects on the role of nationalism, suggesting that even in a deeply ideological state, a shared national identity plays a strong role in shaping public response during moments of crisis.

In the final part, the focus shifts to India. The discussion looks at how India manages its relationships across the region, from Iran to the Gulf, and the constraints created by sanctions and global politics. It also touches on long-term projects like Chabahar and what their future might look like. The episode closes with a broader reflection on where the region may be headed and what space there is for stability after the conflict.

Episode Contributors

Srinath Raghavan is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie India. He is also a professor of International Relations and History at Ashoka University. His primary research focus is on the contemporary and historical aspects of India’s foreign and security policies.

Gaddam Dharmendra is a nonresident senior fellow at Carnegie India. He joined the Indian Foreign Service in 1990 and served in various capacities in Indian Missions across the world and at the Ministry of External Affairs, South Block. His overseas assignments include stints at Indian Missions in Tehran, Dushanbe, Washington D.C., and Dhaka.

Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.
As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.
Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.
Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.

The episode begins with a reflection on Brazil’s 2025 BRICS presidency, which emphasized continuity with the bloc’s original reformist agenda—particularly the push for reform of global financial institutions and greater representation for emerging economies. While Brazil focused on trade facilitation, climate finance, and taxation cooperation, progress on deeper monetary coordination and mechanisms such as the Contingent Reserve Arrangement remained limited. 

Ana Garcia also notes the gap between expectations and reality within BRICS. Despite its growing geopolitical visibility, the bloc has struggled to develop unified responses to global crises and remains economically imbalanced, with intra-BRICS trade heavily centered on China. The New Development Bank continues to expand its project financing and local currency lending but operates within global financial constraints and plays a more limited role than often perceived.

Looking ahead, India’s presidency will focus on consolidating the expanded BRICS grouping while cautiously advancing financial cooperation, climate adaptation financing, and South-South collaboration in health. The discussion concludes that India’s success will depend on pragmatic institutional progress rather than ambitious rhetoric, as BRICS navigates a complex and polarized global environment.

Episode Contributors

Vrinda Sahai is a research analyst in the Security Studies Program at Carnegie India. Her work focuses on Indian foreign and security policy, particularly, India’s strategic engagement with major powers.

Ana Elisa Saggioro Garcia is a Professor at the Institute of International Relations at PUC-Rio. Professor of the Postgraduate Program in Social Sciences at the Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro. PhD in International Relations from IRI/PUC-Rio and Master in Political Science from the Free University of Berlin (Germany). 

Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.
As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.
Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.
Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.

Kumar frames the India–EU FTA as a deal India needed, not one it merely chose, arguing that with the multilateral trade system weakened, FTAs have become the practical route to secure market access and signal openness to investment. He places the EU among India’s “$100 billion club” trading partners and explains why this agreement fills a gap India cannot realistically close with China, and cannot replicate with the United States in the form of a full FTA.
On timing, he calls the early 2010s a missed opportunity but notes that current geopolitical conditions have raised India’s value for Europe, including Europe’s push to de-risk from China and the absence of an EU–U.S. FTA. A major thread is regulation: Kumar acknowledges the EU’s regulatory intensity, but argues India must adapt to global technical and sanitary standards, using the agreement’s timelines and technical assistance to reduce friction and help industry upgrade over time.
He clarifies the trade-offs that made the deal viable: core agriculture and dairy are left out due to political sensitivities on both sides; government procurement is excluded due to India’s constraints and federal realities; and investment protection and geographical indications are kept on separate tracks to avoid a more complex EU-wide ratification path. He also describes how negotiations manage domestic sensitivities through consultation with industry, transition periods, tariff-rate quotas, and product thresholds, particularly in sectors like autos, aiming to expose firms gradually to competition while pushing manufacturing to become more competitive.
In closing, Kumar argues the hard work starts after signing. He stresses that Indian industry must actually use the agreement’s tariff concessions, pointing to historically low utilization of FTAs—and that domestic reforms cannot be postponed if India wants the deal to deliver results. He highlights reforms in agriculture, labor implementation, power, and land acquisition, and ties this to a broader shift he sees globally: trade policy and security policy are increasingly moving into alignment, especially in a world of dual-use technology and tighter strategic partnerships.
Episode Contributors
Dinakar Peri is a fellow in the Security Studies program at Carnegie India.
Ambassador Mohan Kumar has an outstanding career in the Indian Foreign Service lasting 36 years which culminated in his being India’s Ambassador to France based in Paris. Under his watch, the Indo-French strategic partnership was strengthened and consolidated further in spheres such as defense, space, nuclear & solar energy, smart cities and investment. Earlier, Mohan Kumar was India’s Ambassador to the Kingdom of Bahrain where he witnessed and dealt with a strategically complex region characterized by events such as the “Arab Spring”.

Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.
As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.
Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.
Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.