Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Lt Gen Vipul Shinghal
20 Feb 2026 12:00h - 13:00h
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Lt Gen Vipul Shinghal
Summary
In his keynote address, a senior Indian Army officer highlighted how artificial intelligence is reshaping modern warfare, recalling his early experience with paper maps and slow information flow in the 1980s [6-8]. He contrasted that with today’s operation rooms dominated by massive digital displays that fuse sensor data and provide near-real-time battlefield pictures, a shift he described as “like Star Wars coming to life” [9].
To illustrate the risks of over-reliance on AI, he recounted a high-tempo mission where an algorithm recommended an immediate strike with a high confidence score and a decision window measured in seconds [10-13]. The commander paused, not because he distrusted the technology but because his experience sensed an anomaly and he asked, “What does the machine not know?” [14-16]. He discovered that a civilian evacuation had just begun and was not yet reflected in the data, meaning the target could include non-combatants, so he delayed the strike and spared innocent lives [19-21]. He used this episode to assert that AI can accelerate recommendations, but only humans can exercise judgment and bear responsibility for the outcome [24-25].
Citing recent statements by the Prime Minister, he emphasized that AI guardrails are not optional for the military but mandatory given the high stakes [26-27]. He noted that the Indian Armed Forces operate in a uniquely complex security environment across contested borders, multiple domains, dense populations, and high escalation intensity [28-30]. Accordingly, the forces view AI as a force multiplier in intelligence fusion, surveillance, logistics and other functions, and have declared 2024 the “year of networking and data-centricity” [31-33].
Indigenous platforms such as ACOM AI-as-a-service, Sama Drishti, Shakti and Akash Teer have been developed through collaboration with industry and startups, and the army remains open to further partnerships for self-reliant transformation [35-38]. The speaker outlined four responsible-AI principles: (i) certain decisions must remain human-controlled and legally accountable [41-44]; (ii) AI-enabled systems should be treated as weapons and tested in contested conditions [46-48]; (iii) transparency must turn the “black box” into a “glass box” so commanders know the data and training provenance [52-55]; and (iv) commanders and staff must be trained to integrate algorithms into operations [56].
He linked these principles to broader governance efforts, referencing India’s AI governance guidelines and ongoing United Nations discussions on meaningful human control and accountability for autonomous weapons [57-60]. Finally, he asserted that India, as a major military power and emerging AI hub grounded in ethical traditions, has both the capacity and credibility to lead the global conversation on responsible AI in warfare [61-63]. The address concluded that while AI will continue to transform the battlefield, human judgment, ethical safeguards, and international governance remain essential to ensure security and moral responsibility [24-25][57-60].
Keypoints
Major discussion points
– Rapid transformation of battlefield decision-making through AI – The speaker contrasts the early days of paper maps and slow information flow ([6-9]) with today’s “massive digital display” that fuses sensor data instantly and forces decisions within seconds ([10-13]). He illustrates this shift with a high-tempo scenario where a commander pauses a machine-generated strike, asks “What does the machine not know?” and saves civilian lives by applying human judgment ([14-23]).
– Human control, accountability and ethical guardrails are non-negotiable – AI may recommend actions, but ultimate authority must remain with humans; legal and moral responsibility cannot be delegated to machines ([41-45]). Because AI-enabled systems can cause harm, they must be treated as weapons, rigorously tested in contested conditions, and not just as software ([46-48]).
– Indigenous AI development and industry-startup collaboration – The Indian Armed Forces are deploying home-grown applications such as ACOM AI, Sama Drishti, Shakti and Akash Teer, all built through partnerships with industry and startups, reflecting a push for self-reliant, data-centric capabilities ([35-38]).
– Training and capacity-building for commanders – To operate safely in a data-rich, AI-augmented battlespace, today’s commanders and staff must be educated on algorithm integration, system command, and ethical decision-making ([55-56]).
– Need for robust governance frameworks and international cooperation – The speaker calls for AI-specific legal provisions, referencing India’s AI Governance Guidelines and ongoing UN discussions on “meaningful human control” and accountability, positioning India to lead the conversation on responsible AI use in warfare ([57-60]).
Overall purpose / goal
The address aims to inform and persuade the audience-comprising military leaders, industry innovators, and policymakers-that while AI is a decisive force multiplier for the Indian Armed Forces, its deployment must be paired with strict human oversight, transparent development, rigorous testing, and comprehensive governance. The speaker seeks to rally support for collaborative, indigenous innovation and to position India as a responsible global leader in military AI ethics and regulation.
Tone of the discussion
– Opening: Formal and proud, highlighting personal experience and the Army’s legacy ([1-5]).
– Transition: Cautiously urgent, emphasizing the speed of modern AI-driven operations and the critical need for human judgment ([9-23]).
– Prescriptive: Deliberate and normative when outlining responsibilities, accountability, and safety measures ([41-55]).
– Collaborative: Optimistic and inviting, stressing partnerships with startups and industry ([35-38]).
– Aspirational: Visionary and diplomatic toward the end, calling for international governance and positioning India as a moral leader ([57-63]).
Overall, the tone moves from reflective pride to a warning-laden call for responsibility, then to constructive collaboration, and finally to a forward-looking, diplomatic appeal.
Speakers
– Speaker 1
– Role/Title: Keynote speaker representing the Indian Army and the Indian Armed Forces (specific rank or name not provided)
– Area of Expertise: Military operations, AI integration in defence, strategic decision‑making, AI governance and safety in the armed forces
Additional speakers:
– (none identified)
The senior Indian Army officer began his keynote by acknowledging the programme’s length, greeting a diverse audience of industry leaders, academics, AI innovators, fellow uniformed colleagues, and students, and noting the honour of representing the Indian Armed Forces on this occasion [1-5].
He then traced the evolution of battlefield decision-making, recalling the analogue era of his first war-game thirty-five years ago when information arrived slowly on paper maps, notes and telephone reports and commanders deliberated with ample time [6-8]. He contrasted this with today’s operation rooms dominated by massive digital displays that fuse data from numerous sensors in real time, with AI instantly analysing the stream to produce a living picture of the battlespace – a change he likened to “Star Wars coming to life” [9].
To illustrate the risks inherent in this speed-driven environment, he described a recent high-tempo mission in which an AI system generated a high-confidence recommendation to strike a target within a decision window measured in seconds. Although the probability score was high, the senior commander deliberately paused, not out of distrust of the technology but because his experience sensed an anomaly. He asked, “What does the machine not know?” and discovered that a civilian evacuation had just begun and was not yet reflected in the sensor data, meaning the algorithm was mis-identifying civilians as enemy troops. By exercising judgement and delaying the strike, the commander spared innocent lives while still achieving the mission objective [10-23].
From this episode he drew a fundamental conclusion: AI can inform, accelerate and recommend actions, but only humans are capable of exercising moral judgement and bearing responsibility for the outcomes of lethal decisions [24-25].
He reinforced this point by referring to recent statements from the Honorable Prime Minister and other eminent speakers, who stressed that safety guardrails for AI are not optional in the military context but mandatory given the high stakes involved [26-27].
The officer highlighted the uniquely complex security environment in which the Indian Armed Forces operate-contested borders, multi-domain challenges, dense civilian populations and a high intensity of escalation-making AI an essential force multiplier across intelligence fusion, surveillance, decision support, maintenance and logistics [28-32].
In line with the vision of technological transformation, the Indian Armed Forces have declared this year the “year of networking and data-centricity” and are committed to fully equipping the services with AI-enabled, data-centric capabilities [33-35]. Indigenous development has been central to this shift. Home-grown applications such as ACOM AI-as-a-Service, the battlefield situational-awareness platform Sama Drishti, and the sensor-shooter fusion systems Shakti and Akash Teer have been created through close collaboration with industry, leaders and startups, and the army remains open to further partnerships to deepen self-reliant transformation [35-38].
Four concrete principles for responsible AI deployment were outlined:
1. Human control over lethal decisions – decisions of a lethal nature must never be delegated to machines; legal authority and moral accountability must remain with the commander, not the algorithm [41-45].
2. Treat AI-enabled systems as weapons – because they are designed to cause harm, they must be subjected to rigorous testing under contested battlefield conditions where sensors may be degraded by dust, smoke or deception [46-51].
3. Transparency (“glass-box” AI) – the “black box” of data must become a “glass box”, enabling commanders to understand the data sources and training regimes behind AI outputs [52-55].
4. Dedicated training for commanders and staff – personnel must master algorithm integration, system command and rapid OODA cycles to operate safely in a data-rich, AI-augmented battlespace [55-56].
He also recalled that long-standing treaties such as the rules governing the use of nuclear-biological-chemical (NBC) weapons, the Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, and the Convention on the Use of Landmines have historically guided armed conflict [26-27].
These domestic measures dovetail with broader governance efforts. India’s newly released AI Governance Guidelines address the risks of generative AI and embed safety guardrails, while the summit’s daily declaration reinforced those guidelines, underscoring their path-breaking nature [57-60]. The speaker noted that the UN Secretary-General had addressed these initiatives just the previous day, and that the United Nations is actively discussing “meaningful human control” and accountability for autonomous weapons [57-60]. Although consensus on international conventions is still evolving, the very fact of the debate reflects a shared concern for preventing unchecked autonomy that could destabilise strategic stability [57-60].
Positioning India as uniquely suited to lead the global conversation on responsible military AI, he drew on the nation’s status as a major military power, a burgeoning AI hub, and a civilisation rooted in ethical restraint-embodied in the concepts of Shakti (force) and Dharma (righteousness). He asserted that India possesses both the capacity and the credibility to shape international norms and to champion a “Manav Vision for AI” that integrates moral and ethical systems into technology development [61-63]. He stressed that while the nature of war may evolve, the conscience of the nation must remain unchanged [61-63].
In summary, the address charted the rapid transformation of warfare from paper-based maps to AI-fused digital battle-spaces, underscored the indispensable role of human judgement and legal accountability, outlined a roadmap for indigenous AI development and industry collaboration, called for rigorous testing, transparency and training, linked national initiatives to emerging international governance frameworks, and concluded with a moral reminder that technological progress must be anchored in an unchanged national conscience.
Firstly, let me just say this that, you know, I know I’m the last speaker of a long day. So I’ll do this quickly. I’ll come to the essentials. Distinguished guests, leaders of industry and academia, AI innovators, my colleagues in uniform, who are also innovators, students, ladies and gentlemen, a very good evening to you all. It’s a privilege to be speaking here as a keynote address representing the Indian Army and the Indian Armed Forces. You know, 35 years ago, when I joined the Army as a young lieutenant, in my first war game unfolded in a room dominated by large paper maps. Information arrived slowly, handed in notes, verbal updates, reports from the field taken on telephone. We pieced that picture together, physically marked it on the map using color -coded pins and flags, and presented it to the commander, who then took a decision deliberately and with reflection, fully aware that the adversary was operating within similar timelines.
Twenty years later, the rhythm began to change. intelligence became sharper and faster operation rooms had a few screens displaying maps presentations moved to powerpoint the volume of information increased timelines got compressed but there was still space to pause, breathe and the OODA cycle could still breathe today when I walk into an operation rooms the difference is stark it’s like a star wars coming to life a massive digital display dominates the wall input stream in continuously from multiple sensors intelligence is fused almost instantly analyzed by AI presenting a living dynamic picture of the battle space some of the work we did as left -handers is now automated and the commander knows that the adversary is seeing much the same picture about us at much the same speed the pressure is not anymore about awareness it is about decision seconds matter hesitation has consequences it is in this environment of speed, uncertainty and time compression that I want to transport you to an operational stage scenario During a high -tempo military operation, a senior commander was presented with a machine -generated recommendation based on multiple sensor feeds and AI analysis to engage a target immediately.
The system was confident. The probability score of the machine was high. The decision window was measured in seconds. But the commander paused. Not because he didn’t trust the technology. His experience told him that something was amiss. He asked a simple question. What does the machine not know? The pause revealed something the algorithm could not see. A civilian evacuation had just begun minutes earlier, not yet reflected in the data. The machine saw the movement as that of enemy troops, whereas they were civilians. It is even possible that troops were mixed with the civilians. However, the commander exercised judgment and restraint. The strike was delayed, innocent lives were spared, and the mission was still achieved. This moment captures a fundamental truth.
AI can inform, accelerate and recommend decisions, but only humans can exercise judgment and bear responsibility for them. Yesterday our Honorable Prime Minister and many other eminent speakers spoke of the need for guardrails and safety to be built into AI -enabled models. In the case of the military, these are not essential but mandatory as the stakes are much higher. The Indian Armed Forces operate in a uniquely complex security environment. Across contested borders, multiple domains, dense populations and high escalation intensity . Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, let me clearly state that we in the Defence Forces are fully cognizant that artificial intelligence is fundamentally redefining the modern battle space. Its power in intelligence fusion, surveillance, decision support, maintenance, logistics and a host of other functions is a force multiplier in today’s multi -domain battle space.
In keeping with the vision of technological transformation, the Indian Armed Forces are committed to ensuring that the military is fully equipped with the necessary equipment The Chief of Army Staff has formally declared this year as the year of networking and data centricity. The Indian Armed Forces are committed to ensuring that the military is fully equipped with the necessary equipment and data centricity. The Indian Armed Forces are committed to ensuring that the military is fully equipped with the signaling a deliberate shift towards data -driven operations and AI -enabled capabilities. The evolution is powered by many indigenously built applications, ACOM AI as a service, Sama Drishti, which is a battlefield situational awareness software, Shakti and Akash Teer, which are sensor and shooter fusion.
All of these have been built through our collaboration with industry, leaders and startups. Many of the innovators who have been around in this summit for the last few days. For this self -reliant transformation, we are open to collaboration with many startups, innovators to build it further. However, we are fully cognizant that this needs to be a responsible development of AI. Allow me to reflect on four points in this regard. Firstly, what decisions that AI must not be delegated to must always remain human. Human control has to be institutionalized into law and moral accountability. Accountability cannot be with the machine. If a machine recommends a decision with 90 % accuracy and the commander goes with it and it is a wrong decision, it gives the commander a moral buffer.
But is that correct? Secondly, AI -enabled systems are designed to cause harm. Therefore they must be treated as a weapon and not as a software. They therefore must be evaluated and tested in contested field conditions. Remember that the battlefield is a chaotic data environment. Sensors get obscured by dust, smoke, deception and many other things. A system that performs well in controlled condition but fails in a battlefield condition is not a force multiplier, it’s a liability. Thirdly, trust and sovereignty must get built in the system. The commander taking a decision based on an AI -enabled system but know, must know what is the data being used, how it has been trained. The black box of data must become a glass box.
And fourthly, commanders and staff of today need to be trained about this fast evolving battlefield. As I told you about the operational scenario, as it was 30 years ago and it is today in the in a war game we need to be able to integrate algorithms be able to command systems and know how to go forward the indian army is taking steps in training our commanderial staff in this direction the the next thing that i’d like to say is that in some the nature of war may change but our conscious must not it is important to recognize that these concerns about ai safety and governance are not confined to the military domain alone they are increasingly shaping national policy the launch of the india ai governance guidelines and the daily declaration during the summit is a path -breaking step in this direction just happened during this summit this framework defines ai systems being generative and therefore having unintended consequences and this has lessons for us as military planners at this stage i would also like to remind ourselves of a historical truth i do believe in the wisdom of humanity whenever faced with a new crisis we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it and we have to face it The rules governing the use of NBC weapons, the Geneva Convention on Treatment of Prisoners of War, the Convention on Use of Landmines and other such frameworks have stood the test of time and with few exceptions have been followed during conflicts also.
In a similar manner, a set of governance frameworks and legal provisions need to be evolved about use of AI -based systems and autonomous weapons. Already under the framework of the United Nations, discussions are underway around meaningful human control and accountability. His Excellency the UN Secretary General also talked about various such initiatives just yesterday. While consensus remains complex, the debate itself reflects a shared concern for autonomy without restraint that would undermine strategic stability. India, as a major military power, a growing AI hub and a civilization deeply rooted in ethical restraint and understanding that Shakti, that is force, and Dharma, that is rightness, must go hand in hand, has both the capacity. And the credibility to lead this conversation.
The clear and all -encompassing Manav Vision for AI, enunciated by the Honorable Prime Minister in this hall yesterday, emphasizing moral and ethical systems as well as
“The senior Indian Army officer began his keynote representing the Indian Armed Forces.”
The knowledge base identifies Lt Gen Vipul Shinghal as a senior Indian Army officer representing the Indian Armed Forces as a keynote speaker [S10].
“He has 35 years of military service, recalling his first war‑game thirty‑five years ago.”
S10 notes that the speaker has 35 years of service in the Indian Army, confirming the timeframe referenced in the report [S10].
“AI can inform, accelerate and recommend actions, but only humans are capable of exercising moral judgement and bearing responsibility for lethal decisions.”
The source states that AI can inform, accelerate and recommend decisions, but emphasizes the need for human judgement and responsibility [S10].
“Human oversight is essential to ensure moral judgement and accountability in AI‑driven military operations.”
S105 highlights that maintaining humans-in-the-loop is crucial for oversight in AI-enabled targeting and decision-support systems, adding nuance to the report’s claim about moral judgement [S105].
“AI‑enabled systems must be treated as weapons and evaluated in contested field conditions because the battlefield is a chaotic data environment.”
S16 explains that AI-enabled systems designed to cause harm should be treated as weapons and tested under contested, data-chaotic conditions, providing additional context to the report’s discussion of AI risks and guardrails [S16].
Across the keynote and referenced remarks, there is strong convergence on six core themes: (1) human oversight and legal accountability for AI‑driven lethal decisions; (2) AI as a decisive force multiplier; (3) transparency of AI models; (4) treating AI systems as weapons that need realistic testing; (5) fostering indigenous development through industry/start‑up collaboration; (6) building dedicated training and governance frameworks, both national and international.
The consensus is high – the speaker’s positions are repeatedly reinforced by the Prime Minister’s guard‑rail call and UN Secretary‑General’s meaningful‑human‑control agenda. This broad alignment suggests that policy formulation on military AI in India is likely to proceed within a well‑defined legal‑ethical framework, facilitating coordinated national‑level implementation and international cooperation.
The transcript contains only a single speaker (Speaker 1). All arguments presented are from the same perspective, and no contrasting viewpoints or counter‑arguments from other participants are recorded. Consequently, there are no identifiable points of disagreement, partial agreement, or unexpected disagreement within the provided material.
None – the discussion reflects a unified stance by Speaker 1 on AI in the military, its benefits, risks, and governance. The absence of dissent means there are no implications for negotiation or policy compromise within this excerpt.
The keynote’s most impactful moments arise from a series of deliberate pivots: from a nostalgic recount of analog war‑gaming to a vivid illustration of AI‑driven decision pressure; from a concrete battlefield vignette that exposes AI’s blind spots to a principled declaration that only humans can bear moral responsibility; and finally from technical safeguards to broader legal and geopolitical frameworks. Each of these comments introduced a fresh layer of analysis—historical, operational, ethical, technical, and strategic—forcing the audience to continually re‑evaluate the role of AI in warfare. Collectively, they transformed a simple status‑update into a compelling call for transparent, human‑centric, and internationally coordinated AI governance, positioning India as both a practitioner and a potential global standard‑setter.
Disclaimer: This is not an official session record. DiploAI generates these resources from audiovisual recordings, and they are presented as-is, including potential errors. Due to logistical challenges, such as discrepancies in audio/video or transcripts, names may be misspelled. We strive for accuracy to the best of our ability.
Related event
