Content :

1. Tariff wars and a reshaping of AI’s global landscape
2. Use international law to take on Pakistan-backed terror

Tariff wars and a reshaping of AI’s global landscape

 Global Context of Tariff Wars and AI

• Post-2024 U.S. elections, tariffs have been reimposed, targeting key technology imports.
• These tariffs raise costs of AI infrastructure components like semiconductors and accelerators, disrupting global supply chains.
• Ironically, some companies may now relocate data centres to tariff-targeted countries like China.

Relevance : GS 3(Economy , Technology)

Practice Question : How are tariff wars reshaping the global landscape of Artificial Intelligence (AI) development? Discuss the strategic implications for India.(250 Words)

 Economic Impacts of Tariffs on AI Development

• Tariffs on AI hardware rose up to 27% in 2025, increasing AI infrastructure costs in the U.S.
• While aimed at boosting domestic manufacturing (e.g., tripling U.S. semiconductor capacity by 2032), tariffs distort comparative advantage (Ricardian theory).
• Global supply chain fragmentation increases inefficiency, slows innovation, and raises uncertainty.
• Empirical evidence:
  • 1 Standard Deviation. increase in tariffs → 0.4% output loss over 5 years.
  • Reversing tariffs → potential 4% cumulative output gain.

Innovation and Strategic Shifts

• Tariffs can reduce:
  • Incentive to innovate (less competition).
  • Access to cutting-edge imported tech.
• “Deadweight loss” effect: No clear benefit to producers or consumers due to reduced trade.
• Demand for AI compute to grow massively:
  • Power needs: 11 GW (2024) → 327 GW (2030).
  • If unmet, U.S. competitiveness could decline.

 Shifting Global Innovation Landscape

• Advanced AI development relies on access to high-cost compute and global collaboration.
• Tariffs widen inequality in AI capabilities between countries.
• Developed country tariffs: hinder tech transfer.
• Developing country tariffs: speed up tech transfer, but affect wages/innovation differently.

India’s Strategic Opportunity

• India is emerging as a “third option” between U.S.-China tech rivalry.
• IT export growth: 3.3%–5.1% YoY.
• Growth in AI and digital engineering sectors.
• Government efforts:
  • Semiconductor investments (fab proposals, AMD’s $400M campus).
  • 1.5 million engineering graduates/year – AI-capable talent pool.

 Challenges for India

• Heavy reliance on imported AI hardware.
• Tariffs and supply disruptions may slow India’s AI ambitions.
• But also potential gain: Companies may relocate manufacturing and data centres to India.

 Adaptive Technological Trends

• Capital substitution: High hardware costs → focus on:
  • Algorithmic efficiency.
  • Model compression.
  • Software optimisation.
• Result: AI usage cost is falling (~40x per year), softening the blow for end-users.

 Role of Regulation and Data

• Countries with lenient data policies and broader digital access may offset hardware disadvantages.
• Training data access can help maintain innovation pace despite higher infrastructure costs.

Rise of Decentralised AI Development

• Tariffs drive interest in application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs):
  • 30% (2023) → 50% (2028) of AI workload accelerators.
• Historical parallel: Like mainframe to PC shift in the 1980s, AI may decentralise due to market constraints.

 Conclusion

• Tariff-driven realignments may reduce economic efficiency, but also spur decentralised, adaptive AI innovation.
• Countries like India, despite vulnerabilities, are uniquely positioned to benefit from reshaped global tech dynamics.

Use international law to take on Pakistan-backed terror

Core Argument

• India should complement kinetic responses (e.g. Operation Sindoor) with non-kinetic strategies, particularly lawfare — using international law to achieve strategic objectives against Pakistan-backed terrorism.

Relevance  : GS 2(International Relations) , GS 3(Internal Security)

Practice Question : How can international law be leveraged as an effective strategy against Pakistan-backed terrorism? Evaluate the potential and challenges of such a lawfare approach for India.(250 Words)

Leverage Existing International Conventions

• India and Pakistan are signatories to several regional and global anti-terrorism treaties:
  • SAARC Convention on Suppression of Terrorism
  • International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT)
  • Terrorist Bombing Convention
• These conventions:
  • Mandate states to criminalise terrorism.
  • Prohibit terror financing (e.g. ICSFT Article 2(1), SAARC Protocol Article 6).
• Pakistan’s violations:
  • Long-standing role in funding and sheltering terrorists (e.g. 26/11 Mumbai attacks, Pahalgam 2024).
  • India must document and publicise violations using robust legal language.

Present a Legal Case Internationally

• Move beyond diplomatic statements — adopt a law-based narrative with:
  • Verified facts
  • Legal provisions violated
  • References to UNSC resolutions, customary international law
• Send parliamentary delegations abroad to build diplomatic momentum using legal frameworks.

Engage the International Court of Justice (ICJ)

• Most terrorism treaties include compromissory clauses allowing ICJ jurisdiction:
  • ICSFT (Article 24)
  • Terrorist Bombing Convention (Article 20)
• Precedent: Ukraine sued Russia under ICSFT — India can similarly sue Pakistan.
• Benefits:
  • Brings global attention
  • Builds narrative of Pakistan as a violator of international norms
• Past use: India approached ICJ in Kulbhushan Jadhav case.

Jurisdictional and Legal Hurdles

• Pakistan’s reservation on ICSFT jurisdiction may limit legal action — but India can still file to raise the issue.
• India’s own reservation under Terrorist Bombing Convention is self-limiting — should be withdrawn to enable litigation.
• ICJ may interpret treaties narrowly (as in Ukraine v. Russia) — India must prepare strong evidence and legal arguments.
  • Utilize dissenting opinions (e.g. Hilary Charlesworth) to frame persuasive positions.

Strategic Use of Lawfare

• Even if ICJ case outcome is uncertain, filing cases helps build international pressure.
• Lawfare can align with broader diplomatic and national security strategies.
• Helps isolate Pakistan globally and shape global opinion.

Need for Institutional Capacity

• India must build internal legal expertise in international law.
• Integrate international law into strategic policy and diplomatic training.
• Create permanent legal task forces for international legal battles.

Conclusion

• International law is an underutilised but powerful tool in India’s counterterrorism strategy.
• A coherent legal offensive, backed by facts and treaties, can help hold Pakistan accountable and strengthen India’s global position.