Now that the initial euphoria surrounding the AI Impact Summit in New Delhi (February 18–19, 2026) has subsided, it is time to critically assess gains and losses. Overall, the optics was great. India was able to get many global leaders in the field under one roof. The summit was attended by heads of states, policymakers, scientists, technocrats, academics and industry leaders from across the globe. Broadly, the summit has helped positioning India as an ambitious voice in shaping the future of artificial intelligence (AI). There were high-profile panel discussions and various strategic announcements. Various discussions did indicate that the states and private industry are ready for collaborative approach and are showing appetite for reform and social transformation.The global AI industry could be said to have used the 2026 New Delhi summit as an opportunity to present their view about the future of AI and debated on various aspects like future of AI governance, need for evolving standards and safety frameworks and how to use startup ecosystem for scaling up innovation and business. Many global leaders did expand on the idea of using India’s vast AI talent pool, physical infrastructure, and leadership in the Global South as a foundation for building global AI ecosystem. Both major global and Indian firms announced massive AI investments: Reliance Industries (Jio) pledged about $110 billion over seven years for AI and data infrastructure, while Adani Group committed $100 billion through 2035 for renewable-powered AI data centres, projecting a $250 billion ecosystem impact. While Microsoft is committed to invest $50 billion across the Global South by 2030 after earlier unveiling $17.5 billion for India. Yotta Data Services will pay over $2 billion to build a major AI computing hub using chips from Nvidia; Tata Consultancy Services signed ChatGPT parent OpenAI as the first customer for its Stargate data centre initiative; and Larsen & Toubro announced a venture with Nvidia to develop large-scale AI-ready data centre and computing infrastructure. Only time will tell how much of this investment actually materialises and translates into real progress on the ground.”India was able to get 86 countries to sign AI Impact Summit Declaration. Via this declaration India was successful in putting across the views of Global South during this summit in front of the developed world and major AI tech giants who are mainly controlling the AI business. India was also able to present some practical difficulties like lack of compute, issues concerning minerals, limitations arising owing to the absence of reliable internet and unstructured markets.This India guided summit declaration highlights the relevance of AI at the backdrop of philosophical concepts like ‘welfare for all’ and ‘the world is one family.’ The approach has been to push the AI within a human-centric and inclusive developmental framework.The declaration emphasises on the need to address human capital development, democratisation of AI resources, access for social empowerment, AI for science, secure and trusted AI, economic growth and social good, and resilient and energy-efficient AI systems. By covering technical, social, economic, and environmental dimensions, the declaration avoids a narrow focus on innovation alone and also acknowledges the systemic implications of AI adoption. This all-inclusive structure echoes an awareness that AI governance must operate across several domains simultaneously.The emphasis on democratising AI resources is important mainly for the countries from the Global South. Essentially because there are obvious equalities in respect of digital infrastructure, less access to foundational AI tools, basic challenges related to internet connectivity and electricity and trained human capital. The reference to a Charter for the Democratic Diffusion of AI advocates a commitment to reducing concentration of AI capabilities only with a few technologically advanced nations and the private agencies essentially to serving the interests of such states. Similarly, support for open-source AI applications and scalable use cases promotes adaptability, cost effectiveness, and wider participation of states and private AI agencies in AI innovation ecosystems.Another notable strength of this New Delhi AI declaration lies in the focus on trust, security, and robustness. The document recognises the importance of secure AI systems, industry led voluntary measures, and lifecycle governance frameworks. It also highlights the need for energy efficiency and resilient infrastructure essentially to ensure that there are no adverse costs on climate. The attention given to AI for science and international research collaboration is to ensure that AI will advance global knowledge and push for collective progress and would not remain a tool serving interests of few.Particularly, amid concerns that AI may displace jobs, the declaration’s commitment to human capital development offers a measure of reassurance. By addressing workforce transformation, the document acknowledges the socio-economic disruptions AI may cause and seeks to better prepare societies for an AI-driven future. The declaration highlights the need to invest in AI literacy, workforce development, re-skilling initiatives, and training of public officials. It appears that the overall focus is to reassure stakeholders that, while AI may necessitate changes in job structures, there is an urgent need to undertake re-skilling efforts. In this sense, the declaration indirectly suggests that fears of massive job losses may be overstated.However, the declaration looks more aspirational rather than transformative. One basic limitation is that, it lacks concrete implementation details. It does identify goals, but there is a no clear roadmap for funding mechanisms, timelines, monitoring systems, or institutional structures to operationalize these goals. It is strong on developmental objectives, but fails to address the ‘risk’ aspects like algorithmic bias, surveillance misuse, lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS), monopolistic concentration of AI compute, developed states using some utopian rule structure to control technology transfer mechanisms or possible blackmail by AI goliaths to ensure their corporate dominance.The fundamental limitation of this declaration is that it relies entirely on voluntary and non-binding frameworks. It may be argued that, given the early stage of global AI governance, adopting such an approach represents a pragmatic tactic of starting the debate first with the ‘low-hanging fruit’ approach. At this stage, it is important to keep the dialogue open and inclusive and possibly the time is not appropriate for pushing prematurely for binding legal mechanisms. Any such approach may discourage major stakeholders from engaging in the debate at all.But the declaration could have been more forward-looking by at least acknowledging the eventual need for deliberating a rule-based architecture. In a 21st century, world driven largely by market forces and strategic interests, expecting transparency and full compliance on the assumption that everyone will voluntarily comply is somewhat unrealistic. Major AI actors in all likelihood, would be inclined to prioritise competitive advantage over ethical or safety considerations. A legally binding framework would be better suited towards establishing clear standards, creating effective monitoring mechanisms, and ensuring accountability. Meaningful AI governance requires substantive measures rather than symbolic commitments. Only a binding regulatory system can reliably promote transparency and impose penalties for misuse or harm. India possibly could have used this opportunity as a minimum to start the debate on such aspects.In conclusion, India has effectively used the opportunity of the New Delhi AI Summit to demonstrate that it is a force to be reckoned with in shaping the future of AI. Given its vast market size, growing AI literacy, and position as a leading voice of the Global South, India cannot be overlooked in global norm-setting processes. It has succeeded in advancing a collaborative and norm-oriented agenda. However, building on the goodwill generated, India should now take the initiative to push the debate towards the eventual need for a binding regulatory framework.Ajey Lele is a researcher and is the author of the book Institutions That Shaped Modern India: ISRO.