India AI Impact Summit 2026

ai-as-a-topic-and-a-tool-the-future-of-foreign-policy-in-an-age-of-algorithms

7 min read

TRACK:Economic Growth and Social Good
SPEAKERS
  • Gunda Ehmke, Data Innovation Lab
  • Hans-Christian Mangelsdorf, German Federal Foreign Office
  • Norman Schulz, German Federal Foreign Office
  • Sharinee Jagtiani, GMF
  • Shyam Krishnakumar, The Pranava Institute
SESSION OVERVIEW

AI is not just a technological frontier - it is a geopolitical one. The rapid development and deployment of artificial intelligence are reshaping global power dynamics, fueling competition among nations for economic advantage, technological supremacy, and strategic influence. The integration of artificial intelligence into diplomacy and foreign policy is fundamentally transforming how nations engage, negotiate, and collaborate on the global stage.

VIDEO RECORDING

AI as a Topic and a Tool: The Future of Foreign Policy in an Age of Algorithms

Abstract

The panel examined how artificial intelligence is simultaneously a subject of international competition and a practical instrument for diplomatic work. Beginning with a description of the German Foreign Office’s internal AI labs and rapid‑co‑creation model, the discussion moved to the broader geopolitical contest over AI supremacy, the role of middle powers (Germany, India) in shaping the AI value chain, and concrete ideas for Indo‑German collaboration. Participants highlighted the importance of open‑source tooling, the emerging Global Digital Compact, and the UN‑hosted scientific AI panel as mechanisms for inclusive governance. The session concluded with audience questions on the automation of foreign‑policy research and the risk of AI‑generated narratives.

Detailed Summary

Rafael Leuner (Data Scientist, German Federal Foreign Office) described how he arrived at the foreign ministry via the government‑wide Data Labs initiative launched in 2021.

  • Scale of the programme: 16 data labs across German federal ministries by 2022.
  • Early focus: Traditional data‑science tasks such as breaking down data silos between ministries.
  • Shift after ChatGPT: Since the large‑language‑model wave, the lab has pivoted to AI‑centric tools.

Key operational advantages highlighted by Leuner:

AdvantageExplanation
Proximity to end‑usersBeing embedded in the ministry enables “very short contacts” with diplomats and analysts, allowing rapid iteration.
Speed of deliveryTraditional IT projects can take 2 years; AI prototypes can be built and deployed in weeks.
Fast co‑creationJoint development with policy‑makers ensures tools address real diplomatic needs.

Leuner promised later examples—including a negotiation‑support tool and open‑source pipelines—but first the conversation would broaden to the geopolitical dimension of AI.

2. AI as a Geopolitical Topic

Hans‑Christian Mangelsdorf framed AI within the historic continuum of technology shaping foreign policy (industrial, nuclear, space revolutions).

  • Continuity of tactics: While the technology (AI) is new, diplomatic tactics—strategic communication, technology diplomacy—remain familiar.
  • Middle‑power narrative: Germany and India are not frontier AI developers like the US or China, but they can wield regulatory power (Germany) and application‑focused influence (India).
  • India’s positioning: Hosting the AI Impact Summit (re‑branded from the French‑presided AI Action Summit) signals India’s desire to claim a place on the AI stack despite limited frontier‑model capability.

Key Insight: The global AI race is a two‑tier competition—front‑runners chase cutting‑edge models, while middle powers leverage rules, standards, and sector‑specific applications to maintain relevance.

3. Governing AI Within the Foreign Ministry

A brief exchange (moderated by Gunda Ehmke) probed how the German Foreign Office governs AI.

  • Broad view: AI is now a cross‑cutting tool across agriculture, industry, finance, and diplomacy.
  • Historical analogies: Just as nuclear weapons required international treaties, AI will likely need global regulation to avoid catastrophic misuse.
  • Future cooperation: The panel expressed optimism that the US and China could eventually collaborate on safety standards, echoing Cold‑War nuclear arms control.

4. Indo‑German Cooperation: Opportunities & Vision

Shyam Krishnakumar (The Pranava Institute) offered an India‑first perspective:

  • Current AI status in India: Not building frontier LLMs, but excelling in context‑specific models (e.g., 14 domain‑focused models released rapidly).
  • Strengths: Large, skilled workforce; cost‑effective inference; strong industrial data from a massive healthcare system (10× more surgeries than many countries).

Sharinee Jagtiani (GMF) built on this, suggesting concrete cooperation pathways:

  1. Industrial AI – Germany’s automation expertise + India’s data to develop joint smart‑factory solutions.
  2. Healthcare AI – Leveraging Indian clinical data and German automation know‑how to create diagnostic tools.
  3. Open‑source ecosystems – Developing non‑frontier, medium‑scale models jointly, reducing dependence on US/Chinese offerings.

Both speakers emphasized that cooperation should be application‑driven, not a race for the “biggest model”. This aligns with the “middle‑power” strategy of focusing on sectoral expertise rather than raw compute.

5. Open‑Source AI, Chinese Models, and Strategic Risks

Rafael Leuner returned to discuss the open‑source strategy adopted by the Foreign Office:

  • Policy: Prioritize open‑source models and toolchains to retain sovereignty and auditability.
  • Reality check: Many leading open‑source models now originate from China, raising geopolitical risk (potential hidden biases, supply‑chain concerns).

Discussion Points:

  • Risk Assessment: Even if a model runs on German servers, the training data and architecture may embed Chinese policy preferences.
  • Mitigation: Need for in‑house model development and robust bias‑detection tooling.

6. The Global Digital Compact & UN AI Governance

Hans‑Christian Mangelsdorf explained Germany’s role in the Global Digital Compact (GDC):

  • UN‑led initiative to make AI governance inclusive, moving beyond the US‑China duopoly.

  • Two flagship mechanisms:

    1. Independent Scientific International Panel on AI (two German experts, plus US and Chinese representatives).
    2. Global AI Dialogue in July (Geneva), co‑hosted with the ITU AI for Good Summit.

  • Goals: Provide a scientific baseline for policy, ensure broader participation (over 100 countries historically excluded from AI talks).

Takeaway: The GDC aims to institutionalize a multilateral, science‑based governance architecture that middle powers can shape.

7. Sovereignty vs. Multilateralism

A moderator‑led debate (largely between Hans‑Christian and Shyam) examined the tension between national AI sovereignty and global cooperation:

  • Sovereignty arguments: Nations fear dependence on external AI stacks (e.g., Chinese models) that could be politically weaponized.
  • Multilateral counter‑argument: Inclusive frameworks like the GDC prevent a G2‑centric governance model and enable rules‑based order.
  • Middle‑power role: By leveraging niche strengths (Germany’s data hub, India’s deployment capacity), they can push a managed interdependence rather than a zero‑sum race.

8. Closing Remarks & Future Outlook

  • Gunda Ehmke (moderator) emphasized that AI adoption across all sectors is still in its early diffusion stage; the next five years will see widespread rollout.
  • Consensus that small, collaborative groups of middle powers will create open‑source models and application‑specific tools that avoid dependence on frontier‑model monopolies.

9. Audience Q&A

9.1 Automation of Foreign‑Policy Research (Student Question)

Question (Srirang, Ashoka University): Which parts of foreign‑policy research, decision‑making, and implementation can be automated by AI?

Answer (Norman Schulz):

  • AI will not replace decision‑makers; human judgment remains essential.
  • AI can streamline data consumption—rapidly parsing large document sets from NGOs, governments, and academia.
  • By reducing “tedious” reading, diplomats can focus on relationship‑building, synthesis, and strategic thinking.

9.2 AI and Narrative Shaping (Journalist Question)

Question (Sanjeev Nii, UK radio journalist): Will AI help produce more unbiased geopolitical narratives, or could it worsen bias?

Answers:

  • Norman Schulz: AI should not shape narratives; humans must retain editorial control. Unchecked AI could amplify biased or harmful narratives.
  • Hans‑Christian Mangelsdorf (adding): AI can be a tool for bias detection, helping journalists and policymakers spot and correct skewed content.
  • Rafael Leuner: If AI is allowed to author news outright, output becomes repetitive and risk‑prone.

Overall consensus: AI is a double‑edged sword—useful for identifying bias but dangerous if allowed to generate narratives independently.

9.3 Final Audience Interaction

No further questions were asked before the session wrapped up. Moderators thanked the panelists and invited the audience to approach the speakers afterwards.

Key Takeaways

  • Fast co‑creation is essential for AI tools in diplomacy; embedding data scientists inside ministries accelerates prototype‑to‑production cycles.
  • Middle powers (Germany, India) can wield influence by focusing on regulation, sectoral expertise, and open‑source collaboration rather than chasing frontier models.
  • Open‑source AI strategy reduces procurement time but geopolitical risk remains when leading models originate from rival states (e.g., China).
  • The Global Digital Compact and the UN Scientific AI Panel represent concrete steps toward a multilateral, inclusive AI governance architecture.
  • Sovereignty concerns must be balanced with managed interdependence; leveraging each country’s niche in the AI stack can mitigate dependence while preserving strategic autonomy.
  • AI will augment, not replace, diplomatic decision‑making; its greatest value lies in rapid information processing, freeing diplomats for relationship‑building.
  • Bias‑detection tools are a promising AI application for journalists and policymakers to ensure more balanced narratives, but human oversight remains indispensable.
  • Indo‑German cooperation should prioritize industrial AI, healthcare AI, and joint open‑source model development to create win‑win outcomes without entering a costly frontier‑model race.
  • The next global AI governance dialogue (July, Geneva) will be a pivotal moment for embedding scientific consensus into policy, especially for countries traditionally excluded from AI debates.

See Also:

Graph View

Backlinks