Skip to content

KETEMU (Knowledge Ecosystem for Tech, Ethics, and Multisectoral Understanding)

Academia Asia and the Pacific

Responses

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

We believe the Global Dialogue on AI Governance must serve as a critical catalyst for a shared global narrative on AI. To achieve this, it must produce authoritative, evidence-based summaries of deliberations—particularly those from the Global Majority—and strategically project these insights into both digital and diplomatic spheres. By doing so, we can convert the multistakeholder community's intellectual capital into a recognized roadmap for digital governance.

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?

1

Safe, secure and trustworthy AI;Interoperability of governance approaches;

Please briefly explain your selection.

2

There are conceptual tensions between democracy, globalization, and national sovereignty. This "trilemma" suggests that in a deeply integrated global economy, a state can only successfully maintain two of these three pillars. Often, the pursuit of global integration and the preservation of national sovereignty come at the expense of democracy as international forums are frequently dominated by the interests of powerful states (Rodrik, 2001). In the context of global AI governance, the democratic trillema suggests that as states prioritize both global connectivity and sovereign control, democratic legitimacy is the element most likely to be marginalized. Consequently, the democratic deficits in AI governance is not merely an accidental flaw, but it is a structural byproduct of the tension between the global trilemma and the concentration of economic power. So, the Global Dialogue must have the ability to prioritize topics that can resolve a fundamental structural challenge: bridging the divide between informal deliberation and decisive policy outcomes to ensure an equitable digital future for all.

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.

Unbalanced bilateral mandates are pushing Indonesia into digital governance frameworks that may not suit its unique socio-technical landscape. These agreements risk locking the nation into AI standards that favor global powers at the expense of domestic innovation and data sovereignty.

What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?

IGF and its National and Regional IGF initiatives (NRIs). The AI Dialogue can engage in meaningful consultations with those stakeholder groups already active at the IGF networks. Thus, the AI dialogue can strengthen the global digital governance deliberative system and policy direction.