Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Dhaka

In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?

Its unique added value lies in serving as a centralized, science-based anchor that counters global regulatory balkanization. By ensuring the meaningful participation of developing countries , it prevents AI governance from being unilaterally dictated by the Global North. The Dialogue should prioritize addressing the following critical gaps: Compute Deserts: The severe infrastructural asymmetries in High-Performance Computing (HPC) that prevent developing nations from achieving algorithmic sovereignty. Epistemic Enclosure & The Token Tax: The structural biases embedded in Western-centric foundation models that disadvantage low-resource languages and indigenous knowledge systems. Static Legislative Blind Spots: The lack of "continuation governance" for long-lived, infrastructural AI systems embedded in public administration, which leads to dangerous institutional lock-in. Shadow AI & Agentic Autonomy: The pervasive use of unsanctioned external AI tools in decentralized organizations and the vulnerabilities created by highly autonomous AI agents making cross-border runtime decisions.

From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?

AI capacity-building
Interoperability of governance approaches
Protection and promotion of human rights
Open-source software, open data and open AI models

Please briefly explain your selection.

9

To ensure actionable outcomes during the July 2026 session in Geneva , the Dialogue should be structured around four interconnected thematic clusters: Algorithmic Infrastructure and Compute Equity: Focusing on innovative financing (like the Dual Core Finance Model) and Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN) to democratize hardware access. Semantic Sovereignty and Epistemic Pluralism: Exploring the "Digital Bandung" movement and frameworks to curate South-Centered datasets that preserve local cultural identities. Normative Safeguards and the Reserve of Humanity: Codifying human-in-the-loop requirements for high-stakes administrative decisions to prevent "algorithmic necropolitics." Interoperability and Agile Governance: Designing ethical interoperability standards, such as cross-jurisdictional technical compliance wrappers, to facilitate safe digital trade and technological exchange.

In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.

3

The first Global Dialogue should deliver concrete techno-legal instruments, such as standardizing "Algorithmic Impact Bonds"-financial safeguards requiring developers of high-risk AI applications to post bonds that fund societal remediation efforts in the event of measurable harm. Several vanguard initiatives and platforms should be highlighted to illustrate practical implementation: The Giga Initiative & Connectivity Credits: An ITU-UNICEF partnership mapping global school internet access, demonstrating how "Connectivity Credits" can financially incentivize the deployment of digital infrastructure to hard-to-reach populations. The e-Quality Centre & I-3 Matching Fund: Launched to drive inclusive innovation globally, this initiative highlights how multilateral matching funds can provide direct financial assistance to developing nations striving for a "Zero Digital Divide". The Dhaka Declaration 2023: A 10-point action plan that effectively illustrates the necessity of governing Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) and AI as critical, publicly accountable tools. BharatGen: India's sovereign AI initiative, which proves the viability of building multimodal foundation models explicitly trained on massive, linguistically diverse datasets to overcome the Token Tax. The Sovereign Impact Initiative (SII): A partnership demonstrating how sovereign wealth funds can be collaboratively aligned with critical infrastructure needs and SDG-focused digital investments.

How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.

The Dialogue must avoid operating as a static, episodic summit and instead embrace "Fluid Institutionalism." It should function as a continuously adapting network. To integrate the Scientific Panel's work effectively, the 40-member panel's evidence-based, non-prescriptive assessments must serve as the Dialogue's epistemic anchor. By providing updates to the UN General Assembly up to twice a year through interactive dialogues , the panel can ensure that diplomatic negotiations respond in real-time to the rapid evolution of algorithmic capabilities. Furthermore, practical cooperation requires that the Dialogue actively supports the participation of developing countries through transparent, voluntary contributions that fund travel and capacity-building resources.

What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?

To ensure actionable outcomes during the July 2026 session in Geneva , the Dialogue should be structured around four interconnected thematic clusters: Algorithmic Infrastructure and Compute Equity: Focusing on innovative financing (like the Dual Core Finance Model) and Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Networks (DePIN) to democratize hardware access. Semantic Sovereignty and Epistemic Pluralism: Exploring the "Digital Bandung" movement and frameworks to curate South-Centered datasets that preserve local cultural identities. Normative Safeguards and the Reserve of Humanity: Codifying human-in-the-loop requirements for high-stakes administrative decisions to prevent "algorithmic necropolitics." Interoperability and Agile Governance: Designing ethical interoperability standards, such as cross-jurisdictional technical compliance wrappers, to facilitate safe digital trade and technological exchange.