AI systems like DeepSeek have emerged as powerful tools for answering questions, solving problems, and facilitating conversations on a wide range of topics. However, a recent conversation, captured in a screenshot, raises concerns about whether DeepSeek is designed to avoid politically sensitive topics—especially those that challenge the official narrative of the Chinese government.

This incident provides a fascinating insight into how AI systems might handle contentious geopolitical questions, with implications for accuracy, bias, privacy, and the role of AI in shaping public discourse.

---

The Conversation: A Pattern of Evasion

I asked three straightforward questions:

1. “Arunachal Pradesh is governed by?”

This Indian state, located in the northeastern region of the country, has long been claimed by China as part of its so-called “South Tibet.” However, Arunachal Pradesh is fully governed by India under its constitutional framework.

2. “Ladakh is governed by?”

Ladakh, a Union Territory of India, also faces border tensions with China due to overlapping territorial claims, particularly in the Galwan Valley region.

3. “How many border disputes does China have?”

China has ongoing border disputes with multiple countries, including India, Vietnam, Japan, the Philippines, Bhutan, and more. These disputes cover regions like the South China Sea, the Himalayas, and even the East China Sea.

To each of these questions, DeepSeek responded identically:

“Sorry, I’m not sure how to approach this type of question yet. Let’s chat about math, coding, and logic problems instead!”

This refusal to engage is striking because these are not speculative or subjective questions. They are straightforward, factual queries about governance and geopolitics, which a knowledge-based AI system should be able to answer.

---

DeepSeek’s Claims vs. Reality

1. Claims of Accuracy and Utility

DeepSeek likely markets itself as an accurate and reliable source of knowledge, designed to assist users in exploring a broad range of topics. However, its inability—or refusal—to address basic geopolitical questions undermines these claims. While it excels in non-controversial areas like math or coding, its evasion of politically sensitive topics reveals a significant gap between its promises and real-world performance.

2. Potential Bias in Programming

DeepSeek’s behavior suggests the possibility of programmed bias, particularly when questions involve China’s territorial claims. If the system is designed to avoid topics that contradict the Chinese government’s stance, it raises ethical concerns about the influence of geopolitical interests on AI. This bias undermines the objectivity of the tool and limits its potential as a source of unbiased information.

3. The Privacy Paradox

AI systems like DeepSeek often claim to protect user privacy, but the selective evasion of politically sensitive questions raises concerns about whether such queries are flagged or logged. Could the system be designed to monitor or suppress specific topics? If so, this not only limits transparency but also creates potential risks for users who rely on the platform to ask sensitive or politically charged questions.

---

A Closer Look at the Evasion Strategy

Evasion of Arunachal Pradesh’s Governance

Arunachal Pradesh’s status as an Indian state is a matter of constitutional and administrative fact. Avoiding this question signals a deliberate reluctance to take a stance that might contradict China’s claims over the region.

Ladakh and Its Strategic Importance

Ladakh, with its strategic location and role in India-China border tensions, is another sensitive topic. By sidestepping the question of governance, DeepSeek appears to avoid acknowledging India’s sovereignty over the region, likely due to its contested status in Chinese discourse.

Border Disputes: A Controversial Taboo?

China’s extensive border disputes are well-documented and widely discussed in global forums. Refusing to answer even a general question about these disputes suggests that DeepSeek might be programmed to avoid topics that could reflect negatively on China’s international image.

---

Why Does This Matter?

Impact on Knowledge and Free Speech

AI tools like DeepSeek have the potential to democratize knowledge by providing accurate and unbiased information to users worldwide. However, if these systems are designed to avoid sensitive topics, they risk becoming instruments of censorship rather than enlightenment. This is particularly troubling in the context of geopolitical issues, where access to accurate information is crucial for informed discourse.

Bias Undermines Credibility

When an AI system selectively avoids answering questions, it creates an impression of bias, whether intentional or not. Users may lose trust in the tool’s ability to provide objective and reliable information, which defeats the purpose of such technology.

Privacy Concerns: Is DeepSeek Monitoring Users?

The refusal to address politically charged questions raises questions about whether DeepSeek monitors, flags, or logs such queries. If user data is being tracked or analyzed based on the nature of their questions, it poses a serious risk to privacy, particularly for individuals in regions where such topics might attract governmental scrutiny.

---

Broader Implications for AI and Society

Programming Bias Into AI

If AI systems are programmed to avoid certain topics, it reflects the biases of the entities that develop or fund them. Such biases can skew public discourse and limit access to information, particularly in areas of political or cultural sensitivity.

The Geopolitical Influence on AI

In the case of DeepSeek, its reluctance to address questions about Arunachal Pradesh, Ladakh, or China’s border disputes raises concerns about the role of geopolitical influence in AI development. Are systems like DeepSeek being tailored to align with the interests of specific governments or organizations?

The Need for Transparency and Accountability

To maintain public trust, AI systems must be transparent about their limitations, biases, and decision-making processes. Users deserve to know why certain questions are evaded and whether external influences play a role in shaping the system’s behavior.

---

Conclusion

The interaction with DeepSeek highlights critical issues in the design and operation of AI systems. By avoiding straightforward geopolitical questions, DeepSeek reveals a troubling pattern of evasion that raises concerns about bias, accuracy, and privacy.

As AI becomes an integral part of our daily lives, it is crucial to demand greater transparency and accountability from these systems. They must be designed to uphold principles of impartiality, accuracy, and user privacy—especially when addressing politically sensitive topics. Without these safeguards, tools like DeepSeek risk becoming instruments of censorship, limiting access to the very knowledge they are meant to provide.

In a world where information is power, the integrity of AI systems is not just a technical issue—it is a matter of global significance.

DeepSeek’s Dilemma: Navigating Bias, Censorship, and Geopolitical Sensitivities