Chaos, confusion and $200 billion dreams: What I saw at India's AI summit

India's $200 billion AI dreams hit a familiar snag: the gap between ambition and execution matters more than the size of the cheque.

The scenes from India's AI summit, as reported by CNBC, tell two stories at once. On stage, OpenAI announced it would become the first customer of Tata Consultancy Services' data centre business. Google unveiled partnerships for Gemini AI in research and education. The headlines wrote themselves around India's target of $200 billion in AI investment over the next two years.

Behind the scenes? Chaos and confusion, according to attendees. The very summit meant to demonstrate India's AI readiness instead highlighted the organisational challenges that could dermine those ambitious targets.

This isn't just about event planning. When OpenAI chooses TCS for data centre infrastructure, they're betting on India's ability to execute at scale. The partnership signals that India's technical capabilities are real — TCS wouldn't win this contract on cost alone. But if a flagship AI summit can't manage basic logistics, what does that say about executing complex AI infrastructure projects worth billions?

The contrast matters for anyone building AI products. India represents one of the few markets with both the technical talent and potential scale to challenge the current US-China AI duopoly. The engineering talent is proven. The domestic market is enormous. Government backing is strong, at least on paper.

But execution gaps compound. A data centre project delayed by six months doesn't just push back one product launch — it cascades through every company dependent on that infrastructure. The same organisational challenges that created summit chaos could slow the rollout of AI services across India's 1.4 billion people.

The infrastructure bet

OpenAI's TCS partnership is the most concrete signal in this story. Data centres are long-term bets requiring massive capital and flawless execution. OpenAI clearly believes TCS can deliver, despite the broader concerns about Indian organisational capacity.

This creates an interesting dynamic. Global AI companies need infrastructure outside the US and China for regulatory, cost, and resilience reasons. India offers all three advantages — if it can execute. The question isn't whether India has AI ambitions or even AI talent. The question is whether it can build the boring, reliable systems that AI products depend on.

For product builders, this suggests watching India's infrastructure buildout more closely than its policy announcements. The real signal won't be the next summit or funding target. It'll be whether OpenAI's data centres come online on schedule, and whether Google's education partnerships actually reach Indian classrooms at scale.

The $200 billion target might be achievable. But achieving it through disciplined execution rather than enthusiastic press releases will determine whether India becomes an AI powerhouse or just another example of ambition exceeding capability.

---