<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Topic:AI regulation &#8212; Global Security Review %</title>
	<atom:link href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/subject/ai-regulation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/subject/ai-regulation/</link>
	<description>A division of the National Institute for Deterrence Studies (NIDS)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2025 11:14:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.2</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Arms Race in South Asia</title>
		<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-artificial-intelligence-ai-arms-race-in-south-asia/</link>
					<comments>https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-artificial-intelligence-ai-arms-race-in-south-asia/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vaibhav Chhimpa]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2025 12:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Allies & Extended Deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Archive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arms Control & Nonproliferation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deterrence & Foreign Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emerging Threats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Adversaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adversarial attacks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Arms Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI diplomacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI in defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI interoperability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI risk assessment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Scientific Panel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI verification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[algorithm certification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[algorithmic accountability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arms Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[artificial intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[audit trail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[autonomous systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[autonomous weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bias mitigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carnegie Endowment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[civilian control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidence-building measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cryptographic logging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deterrence credibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual-use technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emerging technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[escalation control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ETAI Framework]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[explainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[export controls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extended deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Dialogue on AI Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[global norms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[governance frameworks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human oversight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[human-machine teaming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hypersonic Weapons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iCET]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India-US partnership.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Indo-Pacific security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INDUS-X]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international cooperation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[international peace and security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[machine learning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Strategy for AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[red-team exercises]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reliability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resilience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[responsible AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Responsible AI Certification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Asia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic stability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trustworthiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UN General Assembly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UNIDIR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US-India collaboration]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://globalsecurityreview.com/?p=31719</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>When India’s AI-powered missile defense system intercepted a simulated hypersonic threat in 2023, American analysts were surprised by the ethical framework guiding its development. In South Asia, rapid AI adoption intensifies deterrence challenges as India and Pakistan field autonomous strike capabilities. Existing arms control regimes fail to account for the region’s rivalries, asymmetric force balances, [&#8230;]</p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-artificial-intelligence-ai-arms-race-in-south-asia/">The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Arms Race in South Asia</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When India’s AI-powered missile defense system intercepted a simulated hypersonic threat in 2023, American analysts were surprised by the ethical framework guiding its development. In South Asia, rapid AI adoption intensifies deterrence challenges as India and Pakistan field autonomous strike capabilities. Existing arms control regimes fail to account for the region’s rivalries, asymmetric force balances, and non-aligned traditions.</p>
<p>That gap undermines American extended deterrence because Washington cannot reassure allies or deter aggressors without accounting for South Asia’s threat calculus. AI arms developments in this region stem from colonial legacies and mistrust of great power intentions, creating a volatile strategic environment.</p>
<p><strong>India’s Governance Innovation in Defense AI</strong></p>
<p>India’s governance model integrates<a href="https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-02/Responsible-AI-22022021.pdf"> civilian oversight</a> with defense research and ensures ethical deployment of AI. The Responsible AI Certification Pilot evaluated algorithms for explainability before clearance. Its <a href="https://www.niti.gov.in/national-strategy-for-ai"><em>National Strategy for AI</em></a> mandates ethical review boards for dual-use systems. Developers must document bias-mitigation measures and escalation pathways. Embedding accountability at design phase stabilizes deterrence signals by reducing inadvertent algorithmic behaviors.</p>
<p>The<a href="https://visionias.in/current-affairs/"> Evaluating Trustworthy AI</a> (ETAI) Framework advances defense AI governance. It enforces five principles: reliability, security, transparency, fairness, privacy, and sets rigorous criteria for system assessment. Chief of Defense, Staff General Anil Chauhan, stressed resilience against adversarial attacks, highlighting the challenge of balancing effectiveness and safety. By mandating continuous validation against evolving threat scenarios, ETAI prevents mission creep and maintains operational integrity under stress.</p>
<p>India’s dual use by design philosophy embeds safeguards within prototypes from inception. This contrasts with reactive models that regulate AI after deployment. Civilian launch-authorization channels separate political intent from technical execution, ensuring decisions remain under human control and reinforcing credibility in crisis moments. Regular<a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10493592"> red-team exercises</a> involving independent experts further validate system robustness and reduce risks of false positives in autonomous targeting.</p>
<p><strong>Strengthening Extended Deterrence through Cooperation</strong></p>
<p>US-India collaboration on <a href="https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/06/17/joint-fact-sheet-the-united-states-and-india-continue-to-chart-an-ambitious-course-for-the-initiative-on-critical-and-emerging-technology/">AI verification</a> can reinforce extended deterrence by aligning technical standards and testing protocols. The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/international-center-excellence-in-technology">iCET fact sheet</a> outlines secure information sharing and joint safety trials. Launched in January 2023, iCET has already enabled co-production of jet engines and transfer of advanced drone technologies. Building on this foundation, specialized working groups could develop common benchmarks for adversarial-resistance testing and automated anomaly detection.</p>
<p>A Center for Strategic and International Studies report recommends a trilateral verification cell blending American evaluation tools with India’s ethical reviews. Joint trials of autonomous air-defense algorithms would demonstrate interoperability and resolve. A shared “AI Red Flag” system would alert capitals to anomalous behaviors and reduce strategic surprise. Embedding cryptographically secure logging of decision path data ensures an immutable audit trail for post-event analysis and confidence building.</p>
<p>The INDUS-X initiative, launched during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2023 US visit, integrates responsible AI principles into defense innovation. By aligning standards, both countries ensure AI systems enhance strategic stability rather than undermine it. Expanding INDUS-X to include scenario-based wargaming with allied partners can stress-test ethical frameworks and calibrate thresholds for human intervention under duress. This model can extend under the <a href="https://cdn.cfr.org/sites/default/files/pdf/Lalwani%20-%20U.S.-India%20Divergence%20and%20Convergence%20.pdf">Quad framework,</a> pressuring authoritarian regimes to adopt transparency measures.</p>
<p><strong>Institutionalizing Global AI Arms Control</strong></p>
<p>A formal arms control dialogue should adopt India’s baseline standards for ethical AI governance. The<a href="https://unidir.org/publication/artificial-intelligence-in-the-military-domain-and-its-implications-for-international-peace-and-security-an-evidence-based-road-map-for-future-policy-action/"> UNIDIR report</a> calls for universal bias audits and incident-reporting obligations to prevent unintended escalation. Carnegie scholars propose a tiered certification process under a new protocol for autonomous systems within the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, requiring peer review of algorithms before deployment. Embedding such certification in national export-control regimes would create global incentives for adherence.</p>
<p>The UN General Assembly has established an <a href="https://dig.watch/updates/fourth-revision-of-draft-unga-resolution-for-scientific-panel-on-ai-and-dialogue-on-ai-governance">Independent AI Scientific Panel</a> and a Global Dialogue on AI Governance to issue annual assessments on risks and norms. This mechanism can evaluate military AI applications and recommend confidence-building measures. Procedural transparency would coexist with confidentiality requirements, balancing security with mutual reassurance. Regular joint workshops on risk-assessment methodologies can diffuse best practices and diffuse mistrust among major powers.</p>
<p><strong>Regional Applications and Future Prospects</strong></p>
<p>India’s responsible AI framework must inspire regional adoption and confidence-building measures. Pakistan and China should engage transparency initiatives to prevent dangerous asymmetries in AI capabilities. Proposed measures include <a href="https://www.stimson.org/2024/mapping-the-prospect-of-arms-control-in-south-asia/">joint research on AI safety</a>, shared performance databases, and collaborative development of detection algorithms.</p>
<p>Successful tests of India’s hypersonic ET-LDHCM system, capable of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bSpONUdcms">Mach 8</a> and a 1,500-kilometer range, underscore the urgency of governance frameworks before fully autonomous weapons deploy. The Quad’s model of Indo-Pacific cooperation provides a template for multilateral norms on responsible AI in defense. Extending these norms to confidence-building measures such as pre-deployment notifications and automated backchannels can reduce the risk of inadvertent escalation.</p>
<p>Looking ahead to the United Nations General Assembly meeting on AI governance in September 2024, American policymakers can leverage India’s experience. Joint verification exercises and an ethical audit regime will establish global norms for military AI. Integrating lessons from ETAI and iCET into the assembly’s resolutions can produce enforceable standards that bind both democratic and authoritarian states. This approach will reaffirm American extended deterrence and help prevent destabilizing AI-driven arms races worldwide.</p>
<p>By demonstrating that ethical AI development strengthens rather than weakens deterrence credibility, India’s model provides both technical solutions and normative frameworks for managing the military applications of artificial intelligence. Sustained international cooperation on these principles is pivotal for securing strategic stability in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.</p>
<p><em>Vaibhav Chhimpa is a researcher who previously worked with the Department of Science &amp; Technology (DST), India. Views expressed are the Author’s own.</em></p>
<p><a href="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/AI-Arms-Race-South-Asia.pdf"><img decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-29852" src="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-Download-Button-1.png" alt="" width="241" height="67" srcset="https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-Download-Button-1.png 450w, https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-Download-Button-1-300x83.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 241px) 100vw, 241px" /></a></p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-artificial-intelligence-ai-arms-race-in-south-asia/">The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Arms Race in South Asia</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://globalsecurityreview.com/the-artificial-intelligence-ai-arms-race-in-south-asia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Generative Artificial Intelligence and Deterrence Stability between India and Pakistan</title>
		<link>https://globalsecurityreview.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-deterrence-stability-between-india-and-pakistan/</link>
					<comments>https://globalsecurityreview.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-deterrence-stability-between-india-and-pakistan/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anum A. Khan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 12:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[AI & Deterrence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Archive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategic Adversaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI arms control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI arms control agreement.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI incident reporting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI mitigation centers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[command-and-control systems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidence-building measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crisis management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deterrence stability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disinformation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[escalation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[false flag operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Generative AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military purposes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misinformation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear crisis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuclear war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perception building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security mechanisms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strategic stability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[synthetic media]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://globalsecurityreview.com/?p=28925</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Imagine a scene. It is the Indian military command center on the night of May 28, 2028. A high-ranking Indian military officer sends a message to a subordinate commander; Pakistan has initiated a preemptive strike. Prepare for a retaliatory strike. This is not a drill. Missile flight time between both India and Pakistan is a [&#8230;]</p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-deterrence-stability-between-india-and-pakistan/">Generative Artificial Intelligence and Deterrence Stability between India and Pakistan</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Imagine a scene. It is the Indian military command center on the night of May 28, 2028. A high-ranking Indian military officer sends a message to a subordinate commander; Pakistan has initiated a preemptive strike. Prepare for a retaliatory strike. This is not a drill.</p>
<p>Missile flight time between both India and Pakistan is a few minutes. Hence, commanders do not have time for verification and decide to launch a retaliatory strike on warning.</p>
<p>In Pakistan, a high-ranking Pakistani military officer contacts Pakistan’s prime minister to tell him India has initiated a nuclear strike, and an immediate response is required. The prime minister immediately orders a counterstrike. Pakistan proceeds to counterstrike protocols.</p>
<p>Missiles begin crossing borders between India and Pakistan as the world hurtles towards a nuclear catastrophe in South Asia. The world’s worst fears are realized. It is only later realized that the high-ranking Indian military officer’s message to an Indian commander was made by a nuclear command-and-control system embedded with generative artificial intelligence (AI).</p>
<p><strong>The Role of Generative AI in Modern Warfare</strong></p>
<p>The use of generative AI, which is best exemplified by ChatGPT, by an adversary, or third party, can impact deterrence stability between India and Pakistan. In a worst-case scenario, it could trigger a nuclear war, like the scene mentioned above. Should generative AI be embedded in nuclear command-and-control systems, it is theoretically possible that hyper-personalized messages, like the one described above, could be generated in a system that was not originally designed to allow such an outcome. The potential for a <a href="https://www.wins.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/7.-world-institute-for-nuclear-Security-feb-2024-Giulio-Corci.pdf">tailored</a> message, for specific individuals, is possible.</p>
<p>Traditionally, content and information generation were based on human creativity. However, at present, generative artificial intelligence is being considered as a tool for digital transformation. <a href="https://news.mit.edu/2023/explained-generative-ai-1109">Generative AI</a> is a deep learning model which has the capability to generate synthetic media including text, video, and audio—dependent on training.</p>
<p><strong>Perception Building and the Escalation of Crises</strong></p>
<p>Generative AI can also play a distinctly different role in leading to nuclear crisis. In a deterrence framework, the development of a narrative and perception are crucial. Similarly, communication of deterrence threats is also achieved through perception-building of an adversary—concerning a state’s capabilities and credibility. In the specific case of India and Pakistan, India is creating <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&amp;hl=en&amp;user=BGR-PksAAAAJ&amp;citation_for_view=BGR-PksAAAAJ:UeHWp8X0CEIC">misperceptions</a> regarding Pakistan’s nuclear program. Recently, Pakistani Ambassador Munir Akram, at the United Nations Security Council’s high-level debate, <a href="https://www.app.com.pk/global/pakistan-urges-intl-instrument-to-counter-cyberwarfare-recalls-indian-networks-disinformation-drive/#google_vignette">stated</a> that India is actively pursuing a state-led disinformation campaign to malign Pakistan.</p>
<p>He was referring to recent EU Disinfolab’s <a href="https://www.disinfo.eu/publications/bad-sources-how-indian-news-agency-ani-quoted-sources-that-do-not-exist/">reports</a> on how India is using fake nongovernmental organizations, think tanks, media outlets, and international organizations to malign Pakistan. Similarly, it is possible that India may use Generative AI to manipulate public opinion, thereby, creating misperceptions among Pakistan’s public. This could make the citizenry, as well as the government of both India and Pakistan, susceptible to separate facts from fiction—especially in a crisis situation. Hence, AI-driven narratives could push both countries to a crisis leading to warfighting.</p>
<p><strong>Misinformation and Crisis Management Challenges in South Asia</strong></p>
<p>Misinformation through generative AI can make crisis management and escalation dominance between India and Pakistan much more difficult. According to Heather Williams and Alexi Drew, Herman Kahn’s escalation ladder has transformed into a <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/csss/assets/escalation-by-tweet-managing-the-new-nuclear-diplomacy-2020.pdf">web</a> across domains with multiple actors and alliances, especially in the age of social media. In South Asia, due to mated warheads and cannasterization of missiles by India, coupled with geographical contiguity with Pakistan, nuclear use may become <a href="https://ciss.org.pk/drivers-of-indian-mirv-ciss-strategic-view-v/">ultimate escalation</a> within minutes—without a ladder or a web. Social media could be a threat multiplier and can become lethal with the use of generative AI. Although, tweets are <a href="https://www.kcl.ac.uk/csss/assets/escalation-by-tweet-managing-the-new-nuclear-diplomacy-2020.pdf">unlikely</a> to independently start a crisis, tweets from government officials of India and Pakistan could be fabricated through utilizing hacking and generative AI to escalate an ongoing crisis.</p>
<p><strong>Risks of Generative AI in Command-and-Control Systems</strong></p>
<p>While Indian nuclear weapons may have an effective command and control where nuclear weapons have nuclear safety and security mechanisms, there was a “Brahmos missile crisis” in 2022. Inadvertent or accidental, the launch of a missile could trigger a reactionary strike by Pakistan as the missile is <a href="https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/BrahMos-gains-sub-strategic-super-weapon-capability/article12556559.ece">dual</a>-capable. Furthermore, this fog of war could undermine strategic stability. As a Group Captain was <a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/accidental-missile-firing-incident-prima-facie-fingers-pointed-at-group-captain-101648015107516.html">blamed</a> for the launch, many commanders like him, who may be capable of launching nuclear missiles, even on Indian nuclear submarines, could be manipulated via high-level orders created through generative AI.</p>
<p><strong>False Flag Operations and Strategic Escalation</strong></p>
<p>India has also opted for adventurism against Pakistan through its false flag operations and surgical strikes. Pakistan has adopted a conventional strategy of quid-pro-quo plus as a conventional response to such Indian limited strike. However, malicious false flag operations through disinformation and fake news by India to garner public support for electoral gains and domestic politics can result in crisis escalation in such a competitive strategic environment. It is due to mistrust within the adversarial relationship of India and Pakistan.</p>
<p><strong>The Need for Confidence-Building Measures (CBM) in AI</strong></p>
<p>There is a dire need for risk reduction and confidence-building measures (CBM) between India and Pakistan in the domain of AI. However, the appetite for CBMs and dialogue on the Indian side is non-existent. India and Pakistan could establish bilateral AI incident reporting and mitigation centers to counter the use of AI as a tool for inducing false alarms and other escalatory actions. Furthermore, there is a need for India and Pakistan to further opt for unilateral AI security and regulation measures, especially for inter-organizational and inter-state strategic communications. If leading states like the United States, China, and Russia opt for an AI arms control agreement, less powerful states, including India and Pakistan, may be persuaded to follow suit. This will help establish a universal AI arms control regime regarding the use of AI for military purposes.</p>
<p><strong>Generative AI and Deterrence Stability: A Scenario for De-escalation</strong></p>
<p>It is the night of May 28, 2028, at India’s military command center. A high-ranking Indian military officer sends a message to a subordinate commander; Pakistan has initiated a preemptive strike. Prepare for a retaliatory strike. This is not a drill.</p>
<p>Flight time between India and Pakistan is a few minutes. Hence, commanders do not have time for verification and need to decide quickly whether to launch a retaliatory strike. He calls the command center to verify the message received.</p>
<p>India’s prime minister is contacted immediately concerning the message received by one of his commanders. He picks up the hotline to Pakistan’s prime minister and asks, “Have you launched nuclear weapons?”</p>
<p>Pakistan’s prime minister responds, “Not at all. This is fake!”</p>
<p>India’s prime minister informs the military command center. The crisis is averted, and nuclear weapons are not used.</p>
<p>Confidence-building measures, which were present in the second scenario, have the opportunity to change the outcome of a conflict. Given the potential for artificial intelligence to be used in nefarious ways, it is time to take action to avert such a crisis.</p>
<p><em>Ms. Anum A. Khan is an Associate Director at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS) Islamabad. She is also currently a Research Fellow at Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization and a Project Associate of The Third Nuclear Age Project led by Prof. Andrew Futter.</em></p>
<p><a href="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Generative-AI.pdf"><img decoding="async" class="alignnone wp-image-28926" src="http://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Download-This-Publication-300x83.png" alt="" width="333" height="92" srcset="https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Download-This-Publication-300x83.png 300w, https://globalsecurityreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Download-This-Publication.png 450w" sizes="(max-width: 333px) 100vw, 333px" /></a></p>
<p><a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-deterrence-stability-between-india-and-pakistan/">Generative Artificial Intelligence and Deterrence Stability between India and Pakistan</a> was originally published on <a href="https://globalsecurityreview.com">Global Security Review</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://globalsecurityreview.com/generative-artificial-intelligence-and-deterrence-stability-between-india-and-pakistan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
