Daily Editorial Analysis 4 May 2026

AI and a Gathering Storm of Unchecked Power 

Context

• The influence of Artificial Intelligence (AI) now extends across economic systems, governance, warfare, and everyday human interaction, however, alongside its transformative potential lies a growing sense of unease.
• Developments involving companies such as Palantir Technologies and OpenAI reveal that AI is not merely a technological tool but a mechanism of power, one that raises urgent ethical, political, and social concerns.
• Therefore, it is important to examine the implications of AI’s expansion, focusing on militarisation, regulatory failures, corporate accountability, and the urgent need for global governance.

AI and the Shift Toward Hard Power

• The Ideological Transformation

  • A significant shift in thinking about AI is reflected in the ideas of Alexander C. Karp, who argues that democratic societies can no longer rely solely on moral authority.
  • Instead, hard power driven by software will determine global dominance.
  • This perspective signals a departure from traditional democratic ideals, placing technological superiority at the centre of geopolitical strategy.

• AI in Warfare

  • The use of AI in military operations illustrates this shift vividly. Systems like Palantir’s defence platforms are increasingly involved in identifying and selecting targets.
  • Such developments raise serious ethical concerns, particularly when civilian casualties are involved.
  • The delegation of life-and-death decisions to algorithms introduces ambiguity in accountability and challenges established norms of international law.

The Alarming Absence of Regulation

• Warnings from Within the Industry

  • Even leaders within the AI industry, such as Sam Altman, have expressed concern over the pace of technological advancement.
  • OpenAI’s policy document highlights that AI is evolving faster than society’s ability to adapt, calling for proactive and forward-looking governance.

• Limitations of Current Policy Approaches

  • Governments have largely failed to implement comprehensive policies, relying instead on vague or voluntary guidelines.
  • This gap between innovation and regulation creates a dangerous environment where powerful technologies operate without sufficient oversight.

Corporate Self-Regulation and Its Limits

• Ethical Frameworks by Tech Companies

  • In response to regulatory gaps, companies like Anthropic have developed internal ethical guidelines, such as Claude’s Constitution.
  • These frameworks aim to ensure that AI systems behave safely and ethically by restricting harmful outputs.

• Why Self-Regulation Falls Short

  • While these efforts may appear responsible, they ultimately lack transparency and accountability.
  • Private corporations are not democratically accountable, and their priorities may conflict with public interest.
  • Moreover, such guidelines can be altered, ignored, or overridden, raising doubts about their effectiveness.

From Warfare to Surveillance

• Expansion of Surveillance Technologies

  • Technologies developed by companies like Palantir have reportedly been used for profiling and tracking individuals, particularly in immigration enforcement and predictive policing.

• Risks to Civil Liberties

  • Their widespread use raises serious concerns about privacy violations, racial profiling, and the erosion of civil liberties.
  • While some applications, such as pandemic contact tracing, have demonstrated public benefit, the broader trend points toward increasing state surveillance.

The Myth of Technological Inevitability

• The No Alternative Narrative

  • A growing acceptance of AI’s unchecked expansion reflects a broader belief that technological progress is inevitable.
  • This idea echoes the famous assertion by Margaret Thatcher that “there is no alternative.”

• Critique of Deterministic Thinking

  • As noted by Cory Doctorow, such narratives obscure the fact that technological developments are shaped by human choices.
  • Accepting them as inevitable discourages critical debate and limits the possibility of alternative futures.

The Need for Global Regulation and Collective Action

• Emerging International Efforts

  • Regulatory initiatives such as the European Union’s AI Act and policy proposals from countries like Brazil demonstrate that governance is both possible and necessary.
  • Leaders such as Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva have emphasised the importance of protecting human rights, data privacy, and national interests.

• India and the Global South’s Role

  • Countries like India, which currently follow a relatively soft regulatory approach, have an opportunity to take a more proactive stance.
  • By strengthening legal frameworks and participating in global cooperation, they can help shape a more equitable AI ecosystem.

Conclusion

• While AI offers unprecedented opportunities, its unchecked expansion threatens to undermine democratic accountability, civil liberties, and global equality.
• The growing reliance on corporate self-regulation and the persistence of weak governance frameworks highlight the urgency of collective action.
• Societies must reject the illusion of inevitability and actively shape the trajectory of technological development.
• Through robust regulation, international cooperation, and public engagement, it is possible to ensure that AI serves humanity rather than dominates it.

AI and a Gathering Storm of Unchecked Power FAQs

Q1. How is AI changing modern warfare?
Ans. AI is increasingly being used to assist in military decisions, including identifying and selecting targets.

Q2. Why is corporate self-regulation of AI considered insufficient?
Ans. Corporate self-regulation is insufficient because companies lack transparency and are not democratically accountable.

Q3. What risks does AI pose to civil liberties?
Ans. AI poses risks such as mass surveillance, privacy violations, and biased decision-making.

Q4. What is the solution for managing AI?
Ans. Stronger government regulation and international cooperation to ensure ethical use of AI.

Q5. Why is the idea that “there is no alternative” to AI development problematic?
Ans. It is problematic because it discourages critical thinking and prevents societies from exploring more ethical and regulated approaches to AI.

Source: The Hindu

Keeping India’s Carbon Money at Home 

Context

• The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), implemented on January 1, 2026, represents a significant shift in the intersection of global trade and climate policy.
• Marketed as a tool of fairness, CBAM seeks to equalise carbon costs between European producers and foreign exporters.
• While this principle appears equitable in theory, its practical application reveals structural imbalances, particularly for developing economies such as India.
• The policy raises broader concerns about fairness, climate justice, and economic sovereignty in the global green transition.

CBAM and the Question of Fair Competition

• Unequal Carbon Cost Burdens

  • CBAM requires importers to pay a carbon price equivalent to that faced by EU producers under the Emissions Trading System (ETS).
  • However, European industries continue to benefit from extensive state support, including subsidies for decarbonisation, concessional financing, and the gradual phase-out of free emission allowances between 2026 and 2034.
  • These measures significantly reduce their effective carbon costs.
  • In contrast, Indian exporters face the full burden of CBAM charges without comparable domestic support.

• Concerns Under Global Trade Norms

  • This imbalance appears inconsistent with the spirit of GATT Article III, which discourages internal measures that indirectly protect domestic industries.
  • By maintaining support for its own producers while imposing full carbon costs on imports, the EU risks undermining the principle of non-discriminatory trade.

India–EU FTA: Limited Openings

• No Exemption from CBAM

  • The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA), concluded on January 27, 2026, does not provide India with any exemption or special treatment under CBAM.
  • The EU has maintained a uniform approach, refusing country-specific flexibility.

• Significance of Annex 14-A

  • Despite this, Annex 14-A of the FTA establishes a formal technical dialogue on CBAM implementation. It allows for:
    • Recognition of carbon pricing in the country of origin
    • A most-favoured-nation clause ensuring equal treatment if flexibility is granted to others
  • Though limited, this provision offers India a critical institutional mechanism to negotiate the recognition of its domestic carbon policies.

The Deeper Issue: Climate Justice and Sovereignty

• By shifting part of its decarbonisation burden onto developing countries while retaining the associated revenues, the EU creates a structural imbalance.
• For India, this translates into a loss of policy autonomy.
• Without control over carbon pricing or revenue utilisation, countries risk becoming passive participants, rule-takers rather than rule-makers, in the global climate regime.

India’s Domestic Preparedness: The CCTS

• Establishing a Carbon Market

  • India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS), introduced in 2023, provides a foundation for domestic carbon pricing.
  • It requires industrial installations to hold tradable carbon credits against verified emissions, creating a measurable carbon cost.

• Leveraging CBAM Article 9

  • CBAM’s Article 9 allows importers to deduct carbon costs already paid in the country of origin.
  • This creates a legal pathway for India to ensure that its domestic carbon price is recognised at the EU border.

• Avoiding Double Pricing

  • Crediting CCTS under Article 9 would:
    • Prevent double carbon pricing
    • Maintain environmental integrity
    • Ensure fairness in trade
  • However, this requires strong monitoring systems, transparent pricing mechanisms, and safeguards against policy distortions.

The Case for an India Border Adjustment Mechanism (IBAM)

• A Strategic Countermeasure

  • India can respond proactively by introducing an India Border Adjustment Mechanism (IBAM), which would impose a carbon-based charge on exports destined for CBAM-regulated markets.

• Need for Coordinated Implementation

  • IBAM should not be implemented unilaterally. Instead, it must be developed through the institutional framework of Annex 14-A to ensure:
    • Recognition under CBAM Article 9
    • Seamless offsetting of CBAM liabilities
    • Policy credibility and international acceptance
• Capping the Carbon Burden
  • If properly aligned with CBAM, IBAM can ensure that Indian exporters do not face any higher net carbon cost than what CBAM would impose alone.

Retaining Carbon Revenues for Domestic Transition

• Shifting the Revenue Base

  • A key advantage of IBAM is that it allows India to retain carbon revenues domestically rather than transferring them to the EU.

• Investing in Green Development

  • These revenues should be channelled into a dedicated, transparent fund supporting:
    • Industrial decarbonisation (e.g., cleaner steel production)
    • Renewable energy expansion
    • Hydrogen and low-carbon technologies
    • Worker transition and social protection
  • Such investments would strengthen India’s long-term climate and economic resilience.

Conclusion

• While CBAM presents challenges for developing economies, it also offers opportunities for strategic adaptation.
• By leveraging the provisions of the India–EU FTA and CBAM’s legal framework, India can transform a potential disadvantage into a policy advantage.
• The combined use of CCTS and IBAM enables India to maintain control over carbon revenues, protect its exporters, and actively participate in the global green transition.
• Ultimately, IBAM-ing the CBAM reflects a broader vision: engaging with a carbon-constrained world on equitable terms while preserving national sovereignty and developmental priorities.

Keeping India’s Carbon Money at Home FAQs

Q1. What is the main objective of CBAM?
Ans. CBAM aims to equalise carbon costs between European producers and foreign exporters to prevent carbon leakage.

Q2. Why is CBAM seen as unfair to India?
Ans. CBAM is seen as unfair because Indian exporters face full carbon costs without receiving subsidies like European producers.

Q3. What role does Annex 14-A in the India–EU FTA play?
Ans. Annex 14-A provides a framework for technical dialogue and allows recognition of India’s carbon pricing mechanisms.

Q4. How can India use its Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS)?
Ans. India can use CCTS to establish a domestic carbon price that may be credited against CBAM charges under Article 9.

Q5. What is the purpose of an India Border Adjustment Mechanism (IBAM)?
Ans. IBAM would allow India to collect carbon-related charges domestically and retain the revenue for its green transition.

Source: The Hindu

‹ ›