Speaking on a conservative media programme, Navarro posed a question that quickly spread across social media and policy circles alike: why should US electricity and infrastructure support AI usage in countries such as India? While framed provocatively, the comment taps into a deeper unease about energy costs, digital globalization, and the economics of the AI race.
A Simple Question With Complicated Implications
Navarro’s argument rests on a straightforward premise. Leading AI platforms—most notably OpenAI’s widely used ChatGPT are powered largely by data centres located on American soil. These facilities consume vast amounts of electricity, much of it generated in the US, while serving users around the world.In Navarro’s telling, this creates a mismatch: American consumers shoulder higher power demand and potentially higher electricity bills, while overseas users benefit from the output. It is, he suggested, an imbalance that policymakers may eventually need to confront.
Energy Costs Enter the AI Conversation
The comments resonate at a time when AI’s appetite for power is becoming impossible to ignore. Data centres already rank among the fastest-growing sources of electricity demand in the United States. As AI models grow larger and more sophisticated, so too does their energy footprint.Navarro linked this surge directly to household concerns, arguing that domestic consumers could end up paying more as grids strain to keep up with demand driven by global AI usage. Whether or not the numbers fully support that claim, the political appeal is clear: AI is no longer just a tech story, but a kitchen-table issue tied to energy prices.
Trade Tensions Provide the Backdrop
The timing of Navarro’s remarks is no accident. They land amid renewed friction between Washington and New Delhi over trade and energy policy. Under former President Donald Trump, the US imposed steep tariffs on Indian imports, citing disagreements over market access and India’s continued purchases of Russian oil.Navarro has long been one of the administration’s most vocal critics of India’s trade posture, frequently accusing it of maintaining high tariff barriers and driving a hard bargain. His latest focus on AI adds a technological dimension to an already strained economic relationship between the United States and India.
India Pushes Back on the Narrative
Indian officials, for their part, have consistently rejected Navarro’s characterisations. In earlier disputes—particularly over Russian oil imports—New Delhi described his comments as selective and misleading. The same skepticism applies to the AI debate.From India’s perspective, digital platforms are inherently global. AI services are built to cross borders, and their economic value comes precisely from scale. Indian diplomats argue that trying to draw hard national lines around who “uses” AI and who “pays” for it oversimplifies how the digital economy works.
They also note that India contributes significantly to the global tech ecosystem, from software talent to market demand, benefits that are not captured by a narrow focus on electricity consumption alone.
A Glimpse of Future Policy Battles
Beyond the immediate controversy, Navarro’s remarks hint at a larger reckoning ahead. As AI infrastructure expands, governments will increasingly grapple with questions once reserved for utilities and trade lawyers: who funds the infrastructure of global digital services, how energy costs are allocated, and whether national borders should matter in cyberspace.For US–India relations, the episode underscores how technology is becoming entangled with geopolitics and trade. What began as a question about power bills could evolve into a broader debate about digital sovereignty and economic fairness in an AI-driven world.
One thing is clear: as artificial intelligence scales up, the politics surrounding it will scale just as quickly and far beyond servers and code.