India is strengthening its national 6G strategy through closer cooperation between government, industry and academia, with the Bharat 6G Alliance expanding to 90 members and advancing work on spectrum planning, research and international standards.
The Alliance brings together telecom operators, equipment manufacturers, start-ups, research institutions and universities, and has established seven working groups covering areas such as 6G technologies, spectrum, applications, devices and sustainability. It aims to strengthen domestic research, innovation and intellectual property through industry-academia collaboration and the development of testbeds.
The Alliance’s spectrum working group has published a Spectrum Roadmap for 6G in India, while the Department of Telecommunications has released its own roadmap following consultations with stakeholders, including the Bharat 6G Alliance.
India is also investing in research infrastructure. A three-year project supported by the Telecom Technology Development Fund will establish a 6G Terahertz testbed at the Society for Applied Microwave Electronics Engineering & Research (SAMEER) in collaboration with the Indian Institutes of Technology in Madras, Guwahati and Patna. A high-data-rate line-of-sight link developed through the project was demonstrated at the India Mobile Congress 2025.
India has also contributed to the International Telecommunication Union’s IMT-2030 framework, advocating the inclusion of ubiquitous connectivity among the framework’s usage scenarios alongside coverage, interoperability and sustainability.
Why does it matter?
India’s latest initiatives illustrate how countries are beginning to compete not only in deploying future mobile networks but also in shaping the technologies and standards that underpin them. By combining spectrum planning, research funding, industry collaboration and international standardisation, governments are increasingly treating 6G as a strategic technology rather than simply the next generation of telecommunications.
The emphasis on domestic research, testbeds and intellectual property also reflects a broader ambition to strengthen technological sovereignty. Active participation in global standard-setting bodies such as the ITU could allow India to influence future 6G specifications while supporting the competitiveness of its domestic telecom ecosystem.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Greece has outlined its digital policy priorities ahead of its Presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second half of 2027, placing renewed emphasis on connectivity, AI governance, consumer protection and implementation of the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
During a meeting with the newly appointed Board of the Hellenic Telecommunications and Post Commission (EETT), Minister of Digital Governance and Artificial Intelligence Dimitris Papastergiou highlighted the importance of strengthening competition, expanding next-generation connectivity and maintaining close cooperation between the ministry and the regulator.
The discussions highlighted Greece’s progress in digital infrastructure, with 5G population coverage reaching 99.8% and fibre optic coverage increasing from 38% in 2023 to around 70% in 2026.
Future priorities include extending 5G to critical infrastructure such as transport networks, ports and security services while addressing interference affecting air navigation systems.
The ministry also announced measures to improve consumer transparency through enhanced telecommunications price comparison tools incorporating real-world service quality data. Attention will also focus on ensuring a smooth transition from copper networks to fibre, particularly for remote communities and vulnerable groups, alongside continued deployment of next-generation mobile networks and the DVB-T2 digital television standard.
EETT’s expanded responsibilities as Greece’s Digital Services Coordinator were another key focus. The regulator will play a central role in implementing the EU’s DSA by helping protect users, particularly minors, and tackling illegal online content and deceptive platform practices.
Participants also reviewed implementation of Greece’s national AI framework, plans for an AI Coordination and Know-how Centre supporting SMEs and start-ups, preparations for the 2027 World Radiocommunication Conference and efforts to strengthen Greece’s engagement within BEREC and the International Telecommunication Union.
Why does it matter?
The meeting illustrates how national digital strategies are increasingly bringing together telecommunications policy, AI governance and platform regulation under a single regulatory agenda. Rather than treating these as separate policy areas, governments are integrating connectivity, online safety and digital innovation into broader national digital strategies.
For Greece, these priorities are particularly significant as it prepares for its Presidency of the Council of the European Union in 2027. Strengthening domestic digital infrastructure, implementing EU such as the DSA and advancing AI governance could help shape the country’s contribution to European digital policy discussions during its presidency.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
For much of the past decade, discussions on AI governance have focused on algorithms. Policymakers, regulators, and researchers have debated ethics, transparency, bias, accountability, and human oversight, seeking to ensure that AI systems remain trustworthy and aligned with fundamental rights.
These questions remain essential, but they are no longer sufficient to explain the direction of AI policy.
A new reality is emerging. Increasingly, governments are recognising that the ability to govern AI depends not only on regulating algorithms but also on securing the infrastructure that makes them possible. Data centres, advanced semiconductors, cloud computing, electricity grids, submarine cables, digital public infrastructure, and skilled workforces have become as strategically important as the AI models themselves.
The shift has been gradual rather than abrupt, yet it is now evident across national strategies, international organisations, and multilateral discussions. AI governance is expanding beyond software governance to become infrastructure governance.
AI runs on infrastructure, not algorithms alone
The rapid adoption of generative AI has often obscured a simple reality that every AI system rests on a vast physical and institutional foundation.
Large language models require enormous computing power, specialised chips, cloud infrastructure, reliable electricity, high-speed connectivity, trusted datasets, secure digital environments, and engineers capable of developing and maintaining increasingly complex systems. None of these components can be built overnight, and few can be developed without substantial public and private investment.
Image via Magnific
As a result, AI capability is increasingly determined by access to infrastructure, not just software.
Countries may have ambitious AI strategies, talented researchers, or innovative start-ups, but without advanced computing capacity, modern data centres, resilient cloud infrastructure, and skilled human capital, those ambitions become difficult to realise. Governments are therefore beginning to treat AI infrastructure as a strategic national asset rather than simply a commercial resource.
Industrial policy is becoming a pillar of AI policy
This shift is increasingly reflected in public policy.
The European Union has complemented its landmark AI Act with broader industrial initiatives, including the European Chips Act, the AI Factories initiative under EuroHPC, and, most recently, plans to develop AI Gigafactories capable of supporting the next generation of AI models. The recently adopted Digital Omnibus on AI also strengthens the role of the European Commission’s AI Office while simplifying implementation aspects, illustrating that regulation, institutional capacity, and infrastructure investment are evolving together.
The United States has pursued a different approach, combining export controls on advanced semiconductors with large-scale investment in domestic chip manufacturing and AI infrastructure. China continues to expand its national computing centres, cloud capacity, and state-backed AI ecosystems as part of its long-term industrial strategy.
Although these approaches differ politically and economically, they increasingly share the view that governing AI requires building the infrastructure that enables it.
AI policy, in other words, is beginning to resemble industrial policy.
Infrastructure has become a development issue
The infrastructure shift is equally visible in developing countries, where the conversation is moving beyond access to AI applications towards the ability to build AI capacity locally.
Throughout the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum 2026, discussions repeatedly highlighted that meaningful digital transformation depends on foundational infrastructure. African policymakers, researchers, and technical experts argued that the continent suffers not primarily from a shortage of digital ambition, but from limited access to computing capacity.
Speakers pointed out that Africa has only a tiny share of global AI compute and data centre capacity, forcing many researchers and innovators to rely on infrastructure located elsewhere. The challenge, they argued, is no longer simply connectivity but compute sovereignty, the ability to build, train, and deploy AI systems locally.
The same message emerged during discussions on digital sovereignty. Rather than focusing solely on access to foreign AI models, participants argued that exporting raw data while importing AI services mirrors older economic patterns in which countries exported raw materials while importing higher-value finished products. Building local AI capability, therefore, requires investment in data centres, energy systems, cloud infrastructure, skills development, and trusted data ecosystems.
These discussions suggest that AI infrastructure is becoming an increasingly important component of development policy.
Infrastructure is also becoming geopolitics
The growing strategic importance of AI infrastructure extends far beyond economic development.
Competition over semiconductor manufacturing, cloud services, critical minerals, advanced computing facilities, and energy has become a defining feature of international relations. Governments increasingly view these assets through the lens of economic security, technological resilience, and geopolitical influence.
Submarine cables illustrate this evolution particularly well. Once regarded primarily as telecommunications infrastructure, they are now recognised as essential to AI systems that depend on massive volumes of cross-border data traffic. Recent international efforts to strengthen submarine cable resilience reflect how infrastructure once considered largely invisible has become central to digital governance.
Image via Magnific
Electricity is undergoing a similar transformation. As AI models become increasingly computationally intensive, access to affordable and reliable energy is becoming a key factor determining where data centres can be built and where AI innovation can flourish. This has encouraged governments to align AI strategies with broader industrial, energy, and climate policies.
In this environment, AI governance increasingly overlaps with trade policy, investment screening, industrial strategy, critical infrastructure protection, and national security.
A broader understanding of AI governance
This evolution does not diminish the importance of ethical AI principles or risk-based regulation. Questions surrounding transparency, accountability, bias, safety, and human rights remain fundamental.
Rather, it broadens the understanding of what AI governance entails.
Traditional AI governance focuses on how AI systems should be designed, deployed, and used responsibly. Infrastructure governance raises a different set of questions, such as who has access to the computing power needed to develop advanced AI? Who controls the cloud infrastructure that underpins AI services? Where are critical datasets stored? Which countries have the physical, financial, and institutional capacity to participate meaningfully in the AI economy?
image via Magnific
These questions ultimately shape who can innovate, compete, and benefit from AI.
As a result, debates that once focused primarily on algorithms increasingly encompass semiconductors, cloud infrastructure, digital public infrastructure, data centres, energy systems, connectivity, and workforce development.
From governing AI to enabling AI
The next phase of AI governance is likely to be defined less by entirely new regulatory principles than by long-term investment decisions.
Building trustworthy AI ecosystems will require governments to develop resilient digital infrastructure, strengthen education and digital skills, encourage research, modernise energy systems, expand computing capacity, and foster international cooperation on shared digital resources.
The countries that succeed may not simply be those that write the most comprehensive AI regulations. They may instead be those that create the conditions that allow responsible AI to flourish in the first place.
Image via Magnific
The global conversation about AI has not moved beyond governance. It has moved deeper into its foundations.
In this sense, the future of AI governance may increasingly depend not only on how societies regulate AI, but also on how they build the infrastructure that makes AI possible.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The Government of India has approved Semicon 2.0, a long-term strategy worth Rs. 1.275 trillion (approximately €13 billion) to accelerate the development of the country’s semiconductor design and manufacturing ecosystem.
Building on Semicon 1.0, the programme aims to strengthen India’s position across the semiconductor value chain through sustained public investment, industrial incentives and workforce development.
The strategy is organised around six pillars, such as semiconductor design, manufacturing equipment and materials, fabrication facilities, advanced packaging technologies, research and development, and talent development.
India plans to expand chip design capabilities, attract additional fabrication plants, encourage investment in ATMP and OSAT facilities, strengthen domestic production of critical materials and manufacturing equipment, and support the development of advanced semiconductor technologies.
The government also highlighted progress under Semicon 1.0. Twelve semiconductor manufacturing facilities have been approved with cumulative investments exceeding Rs. 1.64 trillion, covering silicon fabrication, silicon carbide, gallium nitride display manufacturing and advanced packaging. Three facilities have already entered commercial production, while additional projects are expected to become operational during 2026.
On the design side, 24 semiconductor startups have received financial support and 105 have gained access to advanced chip design tools to develop technologies for AI, IoT, telecommunications, satellite communications and smart devices.
According to the government, Semicon 2.0 is intended to strengthen India’s technological sovereignty, improve semiconductor supply chain resilience and establish the country as a globally competitive hub for semiconductor innovation, manufacturing and intellectual property.
Why does it matter?
Semicon 2.0 reflects the growing use of industrial policy to strengthen domestic semiconductor ecosystems amid global competition for advanced chip manufacturing. By investing across design, production, research and skills, India is seeking to reduce external dependencies while building long-term technological capacity.
The strategy also demonstrates that semiconductor competitiveness increasingly depends on developing the entire value chain rather than attracting fabrication plants alone. If successfully implemented, the programme could strengthen India’s position in global semiconductor supply chains while supporting wider ambitions in AI, telecommunications and advanced manufacturing.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Spain recorded 488,426 cybercrimes in 2025, accounting for 19.8% of all reported crime, according to the Spanish Ministry of Interior’s latest Cybercrime Report. The figure shows a 5.1% increase from 2024, demonstrating the growing threat of digital crime nationwide.
Computer fraud and online scams continued to dominate cybercrime, accounting for nearly nine in ten reported offences with 429,677 cases. Internet-related forgery increased by 11.3% to 21,690 cases, while sexual offences rose by 21% and illegal access or interception offences surged by 40.7%, highlighting the growing diversity of cybercriminal activity.
The number of cybercrime victims reached 383,285, up 9.3% from 2024. People aged 51 to 65 were the most frequently targeted, particularly through credit card fraud and travel cheque scams, accounting for 146,737 victims. Although most victims were male, the types of cybercrime varied considerably across age groups and demographics.
Critical infrastructure operators experienced 90 cyberattacks in 2025, a 43.8% decrease from the previous year. The transport sector accounted for 42.2% of incidents, followed by the information and communications technology sector with 15.5%.
Why does it matter?
The report shows that cybercrime has become a mainstream form of criminal activity, accounting for nearly one in five reported offences in Spain. The continued growth in fraud, online scams and unauthorised access highlights how digital crime is evolving alongside greater reliance on online services by individuals, businesses and public institutions.
Although attacks on critical infrastructure declined, the overall increase in cybercrime and victim numbers suggests that law enforcement and cybersecurity authorities will need stronger investigative capabilities, cross-border cooperation and preventive measures to keep pace with increasingly sophisticated digital threats.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has launched a new global initiative to develop international standards for trusted digital identity and agentic AI, responding to the rapid emergence of increasingly autonomous AI systems.
Announced at the AI for Good Global Summit, the new Focus Group on Trust and Identity for Humans and Agentic AI will develop frameworks aimed at strengthening accountability while ensuring meaningful human oversight of autonomous AI systems.
The initiative will bring together experts from technology, policymaking, law and regulation to develop common terminology, reference architectures, trust frameworks, interoperability mechanisms and security benchmarks for AI agents.
The group will also produce a roadmap to support future international standardisation as AI systems become increasingly capable of making decisions, carrying out transactions and interacting across digital ecosystems.
According to the ITU, trusted digital identity and reliable AI behaviour are becoming essential foundations for the safe deployment of autonomous systems. The organisation warned that agentic AI introduces new risks, including impersonation, unauthorised actions and reduced human oversight, making internationally recognised standards increasingly important.
The Focus Group will report to the ITU’s security standards expert committee and hold its first meeting in Paris in November 2026, followed by a second session in Geneva in January 2027. The initiative builds on ITU’s broader effort to accelerate international AI standardisation while supporting trusted and interoperable digital technologies.
Why does it matter?
As AI agents become capable of acting on behalf of individuals and organisations, questions around identity, authentication, accountability and interoperability are becoming increasingly important. International standards could help ensure that autonomous systems operate safely across organisations, industries and national borders while reducing regulatory fragmentation.
The initiative also reflects a broader shift in AI governance from high-level ethical principles towards technical standards that can be implemented in practice. By focusing on digital identity and agentic AI, the ITU is addressing two areas likely to become central to the next generation of AI-enabled digital services.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!
Digital connectivity must become a central pillar of development strategies for landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), speakers at a high-level dialogue at WSIS Forum 2026 on the Awaza Programme of Action 2024–2034 agreed, arguing that digital transformation can help overcome many of the structural disadvantages associated with geography.
Moderated by Amanda Khozi Mukwashi, UN Resident Coordinator in Angola, the discussion brought together government ministers, international organisations, development banks, and private sector representatives to examine how connectivity can accelerate sustainable development in the 32 LLDCs, home to more than 620 million people. Mukwashi noted that while distance from seaports has historically translated into higher trade costs and infrastructure deficits, the digital era offers an opportunity to ‘redefine what it means to be landlocked.’
Delivering the keynote address, Dr Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, Director of ITU Telecommunication Development Bureau, argued that connectivity should be viewed as a moral imperative rather than simply a technical challenge.
‘Digital transformation is not about replacing human judgement with algorithms,’ he said. ‘It is about amplifying human capacity through data, speed, and reach.’
He outlined three pillars for successful digital transformation: resilient digital infrastructure, digital skills and capacity development, and trusted governance frameworks covering cybersecurity, privacy, and inclusive digital services. ‘Connectivity is not a luxury, it is a utility,’ Zavazava stressed, adding that digital transformation must leave no one behind “not by accident, but by design.”
Closing the digital divide
A video message from Rabab Fatima, UN Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, highlighted the scale of the challenge. Only 39% of people in LLDCs used the internet in 2024, compared with the global average of 68%, leaving around 359 million people offline.
Fatima described digital exclusion as a ‘new dimension of landlockedness’, arguing that inadequate connectivity increasingly limits access to economic opportunities, public services, and innovation. She called for stronger regulatory frameworks, increased blended finance, and the proposed Infrastructure Investment Financing Facility (IIFF) under the Awaza Programme to mobilise investment in broadband, digital public infrastructure, data centres, and digital skills.
Representing the group of LLDCs, Mirzo Khurshed of Tajikistan emphasised that digital connectivity affects far more than technology.
‘Connectivity is not only about technology, it is also about trade, jobs, education, health, and economic growth,’ he said. While digital technologies cannot change geography, they can reduce many of its disadvantages by improving access to services and enabling participation in regional and global digital markets.
Regional cooperation and financing
Several ministers highlighted the practical barriers faced by landlocked countries.
Zimbabwe’s Minister of ICT, Tatenda Anastacia Mavetera, identified financing as the primary obstacle to implementing national AI and digital transformation strategies. She called for greater regional cooperation, including shared computing infrastructure and collective investment in digital resources.
Botswana’s Minister David Tshere noted that all of the country’s internet bandwidth must transit through neighbouring states, resulting in costs almost four times higher than those faced by coastal countries. He argued that governments must continue investing in ICT infrastructure while strengthening partnerships with the private sector.
Namibia’s Minister Emma Inamutila Theofelus positioned her country as a potential regional digital hub, highlighting its submarine cable landings, port infrastructure, and bilateral cooperation with Botswana, including passport-free travel and the elimination of roaming charges. She invited neighbouring countries to invest in data centres and digital infrastructure, presenting Namibia as ‘a regional digital corridor’ for Southern Africa.
Regional cooperation was also a priority for Paraguay. Ambassador Raúl Cano Ricciardi explained that Paraguay depends entirely on fibre connections through neighbouring countries to access international submarine cables, making cross-border infrastructure and diversified connectivity routes essential for resilience and affordability.
Public-private partnerships
Development partners and industry representatives argued that achieving universal connectivity will require much greater private investment, supported by public financing and regulatory reforms.
EU Ambassador Deike Potzel outlined how the Global Gateway initiative is supporting satellite connectivity, cross-border fibre infrastructure, and investment guarantees designed to reduce project risks and attract private capital. She stressed the importance of regional cooperation, combining physical infrastructure with regulatory reforms and building pipelines of bankable digital projects.
The World Bank’s Sangbu Kim announced the creation of a new Digital Access Fund, combining concessional finance and public-private partnership mechanisms to encourage investment in underserved markets. He argued that infrastructure investments must be accompanied by policies that stimulate demand for digital services in sectors such as healthcare, agriculture, and education.
Private sector speakers echoed these priorities. Ahmed Riad Ismail, Vice President of Global Standardisation at Huawei, said the company’s rural connectivity initiatives had connected more than 170 million people across 80 countries, exceeding its original Partner2Connect commitment. He stressed that governments, operators, technology providers, and international organisations all have complementary roles in expanding connectivity.
Representing MTN, Lele Modise argued that digital infrastructure should now be viewed as essential economic infrastructure, alongside roads, ports, and power networks. She warned that the greatest barrier is not a lack of opportunity but insufficient risk-adjusted capital to move projects from concept to implementation. Predictable regulatory frameworks, transparent licensing, and investment de-risking would be critical to attracting long-term private investment, she said.
Turning ambition into implementation
Throughout the dialogue, speakers repeatedly returned to a common message that the Awaza Programme provides a shared roadmap, but success will depend on implementation rather than commitments alone.
Closing the session, Zavazava reaffirmed that connectivity is ‘not only a technical goal, but a catalyst for economic transformation, regional integration, and sustainable development.’ Delivering on that vision, he said, will require political leadership, innovative financing, strong partnerships, and coordinated action across governments, international organisations, civil society, and the private sector.
African policymakers, civil society leaders, academics, and technology experts used a WSIS Forum 2026 session to argue that the continent already has the strategies needed for digital transformation but now faces a more pressing challenge: implementation. Organised by the Africa ICT Alliance (AFICTA) and Nigeria’s National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), the discussion focused on how the WSIS+20 outcome document can help translate global digital commitments into practical action across Africa.
Speakers repeatedly stressed that digital transformation requires more than policy declarations. They called for coordinated investment, stronger digital infrastructure, measurable outcomes, and greater collaboration among governments, the private sector, academia, and civil society. Throughout the session, participants returned to a common message that Africa’s digital future will depend not on adopting more strategies, but on delivering tangible results.
‘Africa needs an implementation roadmap, not another declaration,’ he said while presenting UNECA’s Africa 2035 Digital Implementation Roadmap, which translates the WSIS+20 outcome document into nine thematic pillars tailored to the continent’s priorities.
The roadmap identifies major obstacles to digital transformation, including limited connectivity, financing shortages, digital skills gaps, weak regulatory harmonisation, data governance challenges, and insufficient institutional coordination. It also proposes policy actions to address these issues while aligning national efforts with broader initiatives such as the Global Digital Compact and the African Union’s Agenda 2063.
Temtime also emphasised that implementation requires accountability. UNECA has proposed a set of 15 priority indicators, along with a unified reporting template, to help African countries measure progress consistently and reduce overlapping reporting obligations.
‘Measurement is the bridge between political commitments and delivery,’ he said, arguing that comparable data will enable governments to identify gaps, learn from one another, and adjust policies more effectively.
Nigeria highlights national reforms
Representing NITDA, Acting Director-General Dr Dimie Shively Wariowei outlined Nigeria’s efforts to implement the WSIS+20 agenda through national reforms and capacity-building initiatives.
He noted that the ICT sector now contributes between 13% and 14% of Nigeria’s GDP and highlighted several recent initiatives, including reforms to the National Identity Management Act, broader digital government reforms, and the 3 Million Technical Talents (3MTT) programme, which aims to train three million people in emerging digital technologies by 2027.
Wariowei also pointed to Nigeria’s leadership role in the Digital Economy Accelerator Programme (DEAP), which seeks to coordinate digital transformation efforts across Africa through regional cooperation.
Despite this progress, he acknowledged that many countries continue to face persistent challenges, including infrastructure deficits, financing gaps, unequal digital access, gender disparities, and limited digital literacy.
Measuring outcomes instead of activity
One of the strongest recurring themes was the need to shift from measuring activities to measuring impact.
Christiana Onoja, co-founder and CEO of SheCode.ai, argued that Africa has no shortage of digital ambition, but lacks three critical ingredients: accessible computing infrastructure, locally developed AI, and reliable measurement of progress.
She highlighted the scale of the continent’s infrastructure gap, noting that Africa hosts only 0.6% of global data centre capacity and roughly 0.2% of global AI computing resources, leaving researchers waiting days to access computing resources that are available within minutes elsewhere.
‘This is not just an infrastructure problem,’ she argued. ‘It is a question of power.’
Onoja also warned that language inclusion remains a major challenge. Although Africa is home to more than 2,000 languages, only a small fraction are meaningfully represented in today’s leading AI models.
‘When AI enters hospitals, schools and public services, this becomes a question of trust, inclusion and safety,’ she said, calling for greater investment in African-language AI models alongside sovereign computing infrastructure.
To strengthen accountability, Onoja proposed creating a WSIS Implementation Maturity Index covering all 11 WSIS Action Lines, allowing governments to measure outcomes rather than simply counting workshops, policies, or declarations.
Digital inclusion must reach underserved communities
Civil society representatives argued that digital transformation will remain incomplete unless it addresses structural inequalities, particularly those faced by women and rural communities.
Martha Alade, President of Women in Technology in Nigeria (WITIN), said her organisation has reached more than 1.25 million beneficiaries through community-based STEM education programmes across Nigeria, including conflict-affected regions.
However, she stressed that digital inclusion requires more than training.
‘No amount of training can compensate for exclusion from foundational digital infrastructure,’ she said, calling for greater access to digital identity systems, affordable internet connectivity, financial services, and coordinated partnerships across sectors.
Alade also argued that education systems should place greater emphasis on problem-solving rather than memorisation and urged governments to collect disaggregated data capable of measuring genuine transformation rather than simply recording participation.
Evangeline Iwenjiora of the Ivyline Care Foundation echoed these concerns, emphasising that women in rural communities remain excluded by poor connectivity and unreliable electricity.
She argued that educating women creates benefits that extend throughout families and communities, making inclusive digital literacy programmes a key investment for long-term development.
Universities need stronger industry links
Professor Abayomi Jegede highlighted progress within Nigeria’s higher education sector, including curriculum reforms that have expanded specialised programmes in AI, cybersecurity, data science, and related disciplines.
Yet he warned that universities continue to face significant barriers.
Many institutions still lack access to advanced computing infrastructure such as GPUs, academic staff often possess strong theoretical knowledge but limited practical experience, and collaboration between universities and industry remains insufficient.
Jegede also identified brain drain as a major challenge, with many of Africa’s most talented graduates and researchers leaving for opportunities abroad.
He called for stronger partnerships between universities and industry, including practical placements that would allow academics to gain hands-on experience before returning to teach students.
Collaboration as the path forward
Despite highlighting numerous challenges, speakers remained optimistic that Africa possesses the foundations needed to accelerate digital transformation.
Rather than calling for new strategies, participants consistently argued that success will depend on stronger implementation, better measurement, sustained investment, and genuine multistakeholder cooperation.
The session concluded with broad agreement that governments, technical experts, businesses, civil society organisations, and academic institutions must align their efforts around common priorities if the ambitions of the WSIS+20 outcome document are to translate into real improvements in connectivity, digital inclusion, AI capacity, and economic development across the continent.
The WSIS Forum 2026 opened in Geneva with a high-level appeal for stronger international cooperation to ensure that AI and digital transformation benefit everyone, not just the countries leading the technology race. Leaders from governments, the UN, academia, and civil society argued that the next phase of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) must focus on implementing long-standing commitments on connectivity, digital inclusion, and AI governance rather than creating new principles.
Opening the discussion, Annalena Baerbock warned that multilateralism is under increasing pressure, making the recently adopted WSIS+20 consensus resolution an important demonstration that countries can still work together on digital issues.
She argued that AI governance cannot be separated from broader development challenges, stressing that discussions about responsible AI have little meaning where people still lack reliable internet access or electricity.
‘We can have the best AI governance systems in the world, but they will not matter if millions remain disconnected,’ she suggested, pointing to Tanzania’s digital health initiatives, which have connected almost two million people with healthcare services through WSIS-supported projects.
Baerbock also called for stronger cross-regional partnerships and warned that digital inequality increasingly intersects with broader challenges relating to development, peace, and human rights.
Estonia outlines principles for trusted digital governance
President Alar Karis shared Estonia’s experience as one of the world’s most digitally advanced governments, presenting five principles for building trusted digital societies.
According to Karis, digital infrastructure should remain open, secure, and interoperable, while governments should embrace inclusive multistakeholder governance involving the private sector, civil society, academia, and technical communities. He also stressed that human rights must be protected online just as they are offline, digital development should include skills and literacy alongside connectivity, and global initiatives such as WSIS and the Global Digital Compact should reinforce rather than duplicate one another.
Karis also highlighted Estonia’s investments in AI education, noting that all upper secondary school teachers and students are now being introduced to AI tools and literacy as part of a nationwide programme.
Kazakhstan showcases rapid digital transformation
Kazakhstan’s Deputy Prime Minister Zhaslan Madiyev outlined his country’s digital transformation strategy, describing digital infrastructure as the foundation for economic growth.
More than 90% of Kazakhstan’s public services are now available online, he said, supported by a digital ecosystem that includes over 2,000 technology companies and dedicated digital leadership across government ministries.
Madiyev also highlighted recent legislative reforms, including a constitutional amendment protecting digital rights and personal data, alongside plans to build one gigawatt of AI computing capacity within the next three to five years.
He argued that AI should increasingly be viewed as basic infrastructure, comparable to electricity, water, and internet connectivity, rather than simply another emerging technology.
Compassion must become part of AI
The session’s strongest moral appeal came from Nobel Peace Prize laureate Kailash Satyarthi, who challenged participants to think beyond technical capabilities and focus instead on whom AI ultimately serves.
Satyarthi argued that technology is never neutral because it reflects the values of those who create it. He urged developers to embed compassion, justice, and human dignity directly into AI systems, particularly for the benefit of vulnerable children.
One of his most striking proposals was that AI engineers should spend time working with children living in poverty, conflict zones, or remote communities before designing new systems.
‘When they return to their laboratories,’ he suggested, ‘they will write different code.’
His proposal received immediate support from Bolor-Erdene Battsengel, who said she would gladly encourage her own engineers to participate.
AI skills become the new economic infrastructure
Battsengel argued that digital inclusion today depends as much on skills as on connectivity.
Drawing on AI Academy Asia’s work across Mongolia and Central Asia, she described how training around 1,000 teachers enabled those educators to introduce AI tools to approximately 50,000 children living in remote communities.
Rather than treating AI education as a standalone technical programme, she described it as an investment in future economic competitiveness.
‘We no longer simply train people to use AI,’ she explained. ‘We build economic opportunity.’
Kazakhstan similarly reported training around one million people in AI-related skills during the past year and announced plans to launch a dedicated AI University later in 2026.
From dialogue to delivery
Closing speakers from UNESCO, UNCTAD, and UNDP argued that the international community should now shift from discussing digital inclusion to implementing it.
UNESCO stressed that people, not technology, remain at the centre of the WSIS vision, while UNDP highlighted ongoing work supporting national AI strategies and public-sector capacity development across dozens of countries.
Meanwhile, UNCTAD warned that although the world is expected to invest around $800 billion in AI infrastructure this year, most of that investment remains concentrated in a small number of countries. Developing economies, speakers argued, risk arriving ‘after the rules have already been written’ unless international cooperation accelerates.
The session concluded with broad agreement that the next phase of WSIS should focus less on developing new declarations and more on delivering measurable progress in connectivity, AI skills, trusted digital infrastructure, and inclusive governance.
Twenty years after the original WSIS process began, participants agreed that the challenge is no longer defining a vision for an inclusive information society, but ensuring that vision becomes reality.
Ministers and senior officials from around the world used the third high-level governmental plenary of the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance to outline national priorities for AI, while calling for stronger international cooperation to ensure AI benefits are shared more equitably. Although countries differed on regulatory approaches, participants broadly agreed that AI governance must be inclusive, human-centric and grounded in multilateral cooperation if it is to narrow rather than deepen global inequalities.
Throughout the session, speakers highlighted AI’s transformative potential for healthcare, education, agriculture and public services, while repeatedly warning that unequal access to computing power, infrastructure, talent and financing risks leaving many developing countries behind.
Europe pushes safety-by-design and evidence-based governance
Germany and the European Union placed safety, trust and evidence-based policymaking at the centre of their interventions.
Germany’s Federal Minister for Digital Transformation and Government Modernisation, Karsten Wildberger, described AI as ‘an entirely new paradigm’ developing at unprecedented speed and argued that governments must actively shape its future rather than react to it.
‘We must shape AI because otherwise AI will shape us,’ he said, urging countries to embed safety, security and respect for human values into AI systems from the outset instead of attempting to add safeguards later.
Wildberger also announced Germany’s new National AI Safety and Security Institute, which will evaluate advanced AI systems and contribute to international cooperation alongside industry, academia and civil society.
Representing the European Union, Director-General of DG CONNECT Roberto Viola similarly highlighted AI’s enormous promise, pointing to advances in biotechnology, drug discovery and robotics that could accelerate scientific progress and economic growth. At the same time, he warned that AI could also be used to manipulate children, attack critical infrastructure or amplify other societal risks if left without appropriate safeguards.
Viola stressed that governance should remain grounded in scientific evidence rather than political assumptions, praising the work of the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI as an important source of objective expertise for policymakers.
Developing countries call for ‘capacity before compliance’
If Europe focused on governance principles, developing countries focused on the practical barriers that prevent them from participating fully in the AI economy.
A recurring message throughout the plenary was that AI divides extend far beyond access to technology, encompassing shortages of computing power, electricity, broadband connectivity, quality datasets, skilled professionals and financial resources.
Indonesia’s Minister of Communications and Digital Affairs, Meutya Viada Hafid, argued that AI governance should support development rather than simply regulate risks. She introduced the principle of ‘capacity before compliance,’ warning that expecting countries with limited digital infrastructure to meet the same governance obligations as advanced AI economies would neither be realistic nor equitable.
Pakistan’s Minister of Information Technology and Telecommunication, Shaza Fatima Khawaja, similarly warned that the global ‘capability divide is real and it is widening.’ She urged countries to move beyond discussions of principles towards concrete investments in shared computing infrastructure, open-source models, regulatory sandboxes and a proposed global AI fund to help developing nations build sovereign AI capabilities.
Uganda highlighted that Africa currently possesses less than 1% of global AI computing capacity despite ambitious plans to use AI to support economic transformation, while Malawi described facing what it called an ‘impossible choice’ between accepting unacceptable risks or being left behind altogether.
Other speakers from Chad, Mozambique, Somalia and Mali echoed these concerns, arguing that AI governance should recognise different national circumstances while ensuring countries become active contributors to AI development rather than remaining dependent consumers of technologies designed elsewhere.
National strategies offer practical governance lessons
Alongside calls for greater international support, several governments presented national initiatives that they hope could contribute to future global governance models.
Thailand proposed serving as an international AI governance sandbox where global principles could be tested through practical implementation rather than remaining solely the subject of international discussions. Minister Chaichanok Chidchob warned that fragmented governance risks undermining trust itself and invited UN partners to develop scalable governance models through real-world experimentation.
Singapore shared lessons from its own AI governance experience, identifying reliable digital infrastructure, trusted access to high-quality data and strong public confidence as the three foundations of successful AI adoption. The country also highlighted its work on AI safety research and international technical standards.
Rwanda pointed to its national AI policy, newly established AI agency and broader Africa Declaration on Artificial Intelligence adopted by dozens of African countries as examples of regional cooperation designed to harmonise governance approaches.
Other governments showcased complementary initiatives. Chile proposed creating a multilateral network of AI sandboxes operating under common rules, while the Maldives argued that AI can only deliver meaningful public value when built on secure digital public infrastructure, trusted data systems and clear accountability mechanisms. Zimbabwe highlighted its recently launched National Artificial Intelligence Strategy and called for an international AI capacity-building fund alongside mutual recognition of AI ethics standards.
Interoperability emerges as a common governance goal
Although countries presented diverse national strategies, many converged around the idea that AI governance frameworks should be interoperable rather than identical.
Ireland argued that AI governance requires a shared international language built around transparency, accountability and human oversight, while the Netherlands described interoperability, not a single global rulebook, as the organising principle for the next phase of AI governance. Different jurisdictions, Dutch representatives argued, should be able to develop compatible systems based on common standards without sacrificing national flexibility.
Thailand echoed this concern, warning that fragmented governance could ultimately fragment trust itself. Indonesia similarly argued that trustworthy AI depends on interoperability rather than uniformity, while Singapore stressed the importance of internationally recognised technical standards that enable cooperation across borders.
This emphasis on compatibility reflected broader concerns that increasingly divergent national AI regulations could create unnecessary barriers to innovation, investment and international collaboration.
Cooperation remains the defining challenge
The closing interventions highlighted both the broad consensus and the remaining differences over how global AI governance should evolve.
India called on countries to choose ‘consensus over conflict’ before technological progress outpaces diplomacy, arguing that AI governance should provide every nation with a meaningful voice regardless of its level of technological development. Senegal promoted the Global Network for Cooperation on AI Capacity Building and welcomed proposals for a global AI fund to strengthen infrastructure and expertise in developing countries. Bahrain announced exploratory work on a potential global AI treaty initiative, while the United Kingdom highlighted partnerships helping countries across Africa develop local-language AI tools and strengthen domestic AI ecosystems.
The United States, meanwhile, emphasised voluntary cooperation with industry and a pro-innovation regulatory environment rather than binding international rules, illustrating one of the clearest policy differences to emerge during the session.
Despite these differing approaches, participants broadly agreed that AI’s future cannot be shaped by any country acting alone. As ministers repeatedly argued, the success of AI governance will ultimately be measured not by the sophistication of frontier models, but by whether countries of every size and level of development can safely use AI to improve the lives of their citizens.
Track all key moments from the Global Dialogue on AI Governance inaugural meeting on our dedicated page.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
