India is reportedly considering a "cautious approach" to China's proposal for a global AI cooperation organization. This comes amidst increasing discussions on AI governance and is expected to be a topic during the upcoming Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit, where Prime Minister Modi will meet with President Xi Jinping.

While India may engage in dialogue regarding the proposal, formal membership remains uncertain. This cautious stance reflects the complex geopolitical landscape and the strategic considerations surrounding AI development and governance. China's proposal, made by Premier Li Qiang at the World AI Conference in Shanghai, emphasizes the need for international cooperation to establish a global AI governance framework based on broad consensus. The proposal also aims to ensure the development and safety of AI technology.

China's initiative is viewed by some as an effort to counter Western dominance in the field of AI. China aims to promote global cooperation in AI by sharing its expertise and technological products, particularly to support developing nations, as it seeks to advance the Global South in the face of American and Western technological influence.

Several factors could be influencing India's "cautious support". Firstly, India, like many nations, is grappling with the ethical and societal implications of AI. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has already taken steps to address AI governance, with the recent release of the FREE-AI framework. This framework emphasizes the importance of trust, ethics, and safety in the implementation of AI within the financial sector, suggesting a preference for a morality-based regulatory framework.

Secondly, India is also aware of the potential risks associated with unregulated AI development, and is likely to approach any global framework with careful consideration of its own national interests and security concerns. India, with the world's largest talent pool in technology, recognizes the importance of AI and has been strengthening AI ties with countries like the US.

Thirdly, the approaches to AI governance differ significantly between countries. The EU focuses on risk-based regulations, categorizing AI algorithms based on their potential harm. China, on the other hand, identifies specific sectors where there is a potential for harm and imposes strict regulations. India, in contrast, is trying to adopt an 'eastern' approach by basing the regulatory framework on morality.

Ultimately, India's decision on whether to formally support China's proposal will likely depend on further negotiations and clarifications regarding the organization's structure, objectives, and decision-making processes. India will seek to ensure that the framework aligns with its own values, priorities, and strategic interests in the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence.