Shaping Resilient Futures in the Age of AI: Leadership for the Technology, Energy, and Security Transitions

Abstract

The panel explored how three inter‑linked “pillars” – advanced AI/strategic technologies, low‑carbon energy systems, and modern security capabilities – must evolve together to build societal resilience. Participants examined practical pathways for regulation, governance, public trust and international cooperation, drawing on experiences from India, Israel and the Pranava Institute. The discussion highlighted sector‑specific regulation, the role of firms in responsible AI, the importance of inclusive public engagement, and emerging coordination mechanisms such as Israel’s new AI Directorate.

Detailed Summary

Deepak Bagla opened the session by describing India’s bottom‑up innovation strategy. He highlighted:

School‑to‑space pipeline – over 10 000 schools host labs, with a target of adding 50 000 more.
Atal Incubation Mission – recent milestone of 100 incubators, 20 % located in small towns, aiming to create “social unicorns” that tackle problems affecting a billion lives.
Government‑level integration – creation of an AI cell inside the Ministry of Defence to embed technology across ministries and state governments, forging a “web of innovation” that links grassroots startups with high‑end national projects.

Bagla’s remarks set the tone for the panel’s focus on inclusive, ground‑up innovation as a foundation for resilient futures.

2. Israel’s Approach to AI Regulation

Sarith Felber (Ministry of Justice, Israel) provided a detailed overview of Israel’s regulatory philosophy:

Point	Content
Sector‑specific regulation	Israel avoids a single, horizontal AI law. Instead, each sector (finance, health, education, public sector) assesses whether existing rules enable or block AI, and adapts accordingly.
Balancing innovation and safety	Small market (≈10 M people) forces Israeli firms to design for global markets; regulation must not stifle competitiveness yet must protect public interest (e.g., credit access, civil liberties).
Risk‑based, proportionate approach	Regulation should be measured against the specific risk of an application, not a blanket restriction.
Regulatory arbitrage risk	Different regulators could adopt divergent strictness, potentially creating loopholes.
AI Directorate Act	A newly established AI Directorate (located in the Prime Minister’s Office) is intended to harmonise sectoral policies, allocate resources, and provide long‑term strategic guidance (10‑15 year horizon).

Felber emphasized that trust is central: “Artificial intelligence requires human trust; regulation is a tool to build that trust.” She also noted the challenge of political instability in Israel, which makes long‑term policy planning difficult, underscoring the need for a dedicated, professional directorate.

3. Firm‑Level Governance as an Enabler

Tanya Filer (moderator) steered the conversation to the role of private firms.

Shyam Krishnakumar responded by framing three “big goals” for resilient futures:

Climate‑resilient infrastructure – clean energy & low‑carbon systems.
Dynamic, innovative economy – fostering opportunities & problem‑solving.
Secure, self‑determining societies – robust defence capabilities.

Krishnakumar warned about the Jevons paradox (greater efficiency can spur higher demand) and stressed the need for rules that prevent the system from “fracturing”. He argued that regulation alone is insufficient; without clear enforcement signals, industry will test the limits (“push the boundaries”).

Key observations:

Light‑touch governance – Australia, Israel, and India are experimenting with “technology‑neutral” rules that give firms flexibility while safeguarding public interest.
Governance pitfalls – Companies rushing to adopt AI without a structured governance framework may fall foul of regulations. Decision‑makers should start from problem definition, then design processes that build trust across clients, customers, and stakeholders.

Krishnakumar concluded that policy must align incentives across the entire stack, from the boardroom to the technical teams, to ensure responsible AI deployment.

4. Building Public Trust – The Indian Perspective

Harsh Vardhan Shringla (Rajya Sabha) discussed how India cultivates public confidence in AI‑driven resilience measures. Highlights:

Inclusive outreach – The AI summit and related events deliberately invite the public (e.g., a restaurant waiter encouraging his children to visit the exhibition).
G20‑style decentralisation – Hosting the summit across multiple Indian states (Gujarat, Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir, Kerala) to demonstrate national participation.
Democratizing AI – Reference to Anthropic’s CEO stating that India can democratise AI for the Global South.
AI for public services – Examples include:
- Drones for land‑zoning & agricultural mapping – reducing property disputes.
- CoWIN platform during COVID‑19 – managed 2 billion vaccinations, illustrating scalable AI‑enabled public health.
Trust‑centric budgeting – Emphasis that any public spending on AI must be transparent and accountable, especially with the upcoming 15 % increase in defence budget.

Shringla stressed that no money should be spent without public trust and confidence, and that India must “leapfrog” technologies while remaining a constructive player in global AI governance.

5. Policy‑Maker’s Dilemma – Inclusion, Empowerment, and Trust

Deepak Bagla revisited the theme of policy as a trust‑builder:

Policy reflects societal mood – Legislators must read public sentiment and craft regulations that reinforce trust.
Collective responsibility – Trust is not just governmental; every citizen, private entity, and public body shares the burden.
Bottom‑up versus top‑down – India is moving away from a purely top‑down approach, favouring bottom‑up empowerment that gives stakeholders a direct voice, thereby enhancing flexibility and societal alignment.
Innovation‑friendly regulatory stance – India tends to tilt toward innovation, but must balance this with regulatory clarity to avoid “regulation‑as‑obstacle” scenarios.

Bagla’s remarks positioned policy‑making as one of the most challenging jobs today, requiring nuanced coordination across rapidly evolving technologies.

6. Inter‑Agency Cooperation in Israel

Sarith Felber returned to discuss Israel’s inter‑ministerial collaboration:

Current siloed reality – AI is a “shining toy” that each ministry wants to control, leading to fragmented efforts.
AI Directorate’s role – Centralised body located in the Prime Minister’s Office, tasked with:
- Long‑term strategic planning (10‑15 year horizon).
- Resource allocation (money, time, expertise).
- Facilitating cross‑sector dialogue – ensuring finance, education, transport, and defence ministries receive tailored AI support.
Case study – public housing eligibility – AI reduced decision‑making time from 6‑7 hours to 70 % faster by automating document analysis, thereby improving transparency and public trust.

Felber underscored that government‑led AI adoption, when responsible, serves as a trust‑building exemplar for the private sector.

7. International Cooperation & Global Governance

Harsh Vardhan Shringla (as former Foreign Secretary) broadened the discussion to regional and global coordination:

Existing bodies (UN, WTO, Bretton Woods institutions) are not equipped for frontier technologies such as AI, critical minerals, or autonomous weapons.
Need for new frameworks – Proposes an international governance structure that assigns shared responsibilities, especially for AI‑driven disinformation, cyber‑crime, and crypto regulation.
AI summit as a catalyst – Highlights the summit’s role in fostering cross‑border dialogue and shaping future standards.

Nick [Unnamed speaker] added a technical perspective on standards:

ISO 42001 (AI management system) as a key organizational standard.
Three essential questions for any AI deployment:
1. Is it the right tool for the job? (e.g., lighter‑weight local models vs. cloud services).
2. Who is the team using it? – Emphasises that collective, transparent use is under‑investigated.
3. What are the trade‑offs? – Particularly relevant for military AI where human control remains paramount.

These contributions painted a picture of multi‑layered governance – from national regulations to international standards – all aimed at building trust and ensuring responsible AI use.

8. Closing Remarks

Shyam Krishnakumar thanked the participants, highlighted the partnership with the Pranava Institute and Akiya India, and invited attendees to a follow‑up session on “Tech Diplomacy” at the British Pavilion.
A brief appreciation ceremony was mentioned for Deepak Bagla, with representatives from Méti presenting a token of gratitude.

The session concluded after a final thank‑you from the moderator, reinforcing the collective commitment to collaborative, trustworthy, and resilient AI‑enabled futures.

Key Takeaways

Inclusive, bottom‑up innovation (schools, incubators, small‑town startups) is vital for societal resilience; India’s Atal Innovation Mission exemplifies this model.
Israel’s sector‑specific, risk‑based AI regulation balances global market competitiveness with public safety, and the new AI Directorate aims to harmonise fragmented policies.
Firms must embed governance that starts from problem definition, aligns incentives across teams, and builds trust with stakeholders; light‑touch, technology‑neutral rules can facilitate this.
Public trust is a prerequisite for any AI investment—India’s outreach, democratic AI narrative, and transparent public‑service use cases (drones, CoWIN) illustrate effective trust‑building.
Policy‑making is a collective, trust‑driven responsibility; bottom‑up empowerment and clear, enforceable regulations are essential to avoid “regulation‑as‑obstacle” pitfalls.
Inter‑agency coordination (as pursued by Israel’s AI Directorate) reduces silos and accelerates responsible AI deployment across ministries.
International governance gaps demand new frameworks beyond existing UN/WTO structures; standards such as ISO 42001 and cross‑border dialogues are crucial for globally trustworthy AI.
Choosing the right tool and team matters – appropriate model size, energy footprint, and transparent teamwork are core to safe AI use, especially in high‑stakes domains like defence.
Collaboration across sectors and borders is the linchpin of the “triple transition” (technology, energy, security) needed for resilient futures.

See Also:

India AI Impact Summit 2026

Explorer

shaping-resilient-futures-in-the-age-of-ai-leadership-for-the-technology-energy-and-security-transitions