Discuss the significance of BRICS' 2026 New Delhi Declaration in shaping a Global South perspective on AI governance. How does it differ from Western-led AI regulatory frameworks?

Adopted at the 18th BRICS Summit held at Bharat Mandapam, New Delhi, on 12–13 September 2026 under India's BRICS Chairship [1][2], the New Delhi Declaration commits members to implementing a separate BRICS Leaders' Statement on the Global Governance of Artificial Intelligence — the grouping's first consolidated articulation of a developing-country position on AI rule-making.

Significance for a Global South perspective

• Access and equity: the call for wider access to AI resources targets the emerging compute and data divide, framing AI capability, not merely AI risk, as the core justice question [1].
• Voice in rule-making: it asserts that developing countries must help frame the rules governing future technologies, contesting a standard-setting process concentrated in a few jurisdictions [1].
• Institutional continuity: it endorses India's AI Impact Summit 2026 (New Delhi, February 2026), whose New Delhi Declaration on AI Impact drew 92 countries and international organisations and was built on seven thematic "Chakras" including democratising AI resources and energy efficiency [3][4] — giving BRICS's position wider legitimacy.
• Development-first bundling: AI sits inside a broader agenda of Digital Public Infrastructure, cybersecurity, quantum technologies and advanced manufacturing, tying AI to India's DPI-led development template [1].

Divergence from Western-led frameworks

• Purpose: Western instruments such as the EU AI Act and the G7 Hiroshima process emphasise risk classification and compliance; BRICS emphasises inclusion, capability-building and technology transfer.
• Form: BRICS proceeds through a soft-law, consensus declaration ("committed to implementing"), not a binding regulation with penalties — flexible, but dependent on national follow-through.
• Forum: it prefers plurilateral Global South platforms over transatlantic standard-setting bodies, and foregrounds sovereignty and data security concerns of developing states.

The Declaration is best read not as a rival rulebook but as an agenda-shaping intervention that shifts global debate from risk-containment alone towards equitable access. Its value will depend on converting declaratory commitments into shared compute, datasets and skilling — a path consistent with SDG 9 and SDG 17, and with India's stated ambition of making AI a public good for all.