Microsoft Azure Powers UAE Sovereign Cloud Initiative
Home » Tech Value Chain » Global Brands » Microsoft Azure Powers UAE Sovereign Cloud Initiative
Microsoft and Core42, a G42 company specializing in sovereign cloud, AI infrastructure, and digital services, have announced the release of a new whitepaper. The report is titled 'Balancing Innovation and Compliance in the AI Era: Core42 Sovereign Public Cloud Leveraging Microsoft Azure.' It explores how sovereign public cloud solutions can shape the UAE's digital future.
The whitepaper reveals strategic insights and best practices for technology leaders. It also emphasizes how sovereign public clouds balance innovation with regulatory compliance.
Sovereign cloud solutions are essential for data sovereignty. These systems ensure data is stored and managed within national borders. This is critical for protecting sensitive information like personal data, intellectual property, and financial records.
Moreover, they enhance privacy through strict access controls and encryption. These clouds help organizations meet regulatory demands and provide operational control.
They also support national digital strategies by: Strengthening local infrastructure and reducing foreign reliance
Offering scalable and cost-efficient public cloud benefits
The whitepaper highlights that modern sovereign clouds remove the trade-off between innovation and regulation.
Several real-world UAE use cases are included: AI-powered fraud detection in financial services
Predictive diagnostics in healthcare
Government citizen data protection
Real-time analytics in energy
The report also discusses the UAE's major investments in AI and cloud computing. One example is Abu Dhabi's goal to become the world's first fully AI-native government by 2027.
It further notes that global sovereign cloud spending is expected to nearly double—from $133 billion in 2024 to $259 billion in 2027.
Sherif Tawfik, Chief Partnership Officer – AI & Cloud for Sovereignty at Microsoft, reaffirmed the company's support for the UAE's digital ambitions. He said Microsoft Azure is delivering secure, compliant, and innovative cloud infrastructure tailored for regulated industries in the region.
Adrian Hobbs, Chief Technology Officer at Core42, emphasized that their Insight platform ensures full sovereign control. He said the collaboration allows businesses to innovate securely and meet all compliance needs.
Recently, the Abu Dhabi Government announced a landmark agreement with Microsoft and Core42. The multi-year project will establish a sovereign cloud system for processing over 11 million daily digital interactions.
This initiative will connect government entities, citizens, residents, and businesses.
The collaboration highlights a shared commitment to drive innovation while ensuring compliance with UAE regulations.
The Core42 Sovereign Public Cloud, powered by Microsoft Azure, stands as a model for secure, compliant, and transformative digital infrastructure in the AI era.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Google antitrust case: AI takes centre stage in closing arguments
During closing arguments in the penalty portion of the Google antitrust trial on Friday, the judge asked a question about the fast-moving tech world that will likely give pause to legal and business experts. Federal Judge Amit Mehta, who last year found Alphabet-owned Google liable for maintaining a monopoly and exploiting its search sector dominance, wanted to know how search will evolve as he decides the "remedies", or punishment, for Google. 'Does the government believe there's a market for a new search engine to emerge as we think of it today, even with the remedies in place?' he said, interrupting Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyer David Dahlquist's closing arguments. Mr Mehta was referring to artificial intelligence. He implied that as he decides how to correct Google's monopoly, he needs to consider how quickly the tech landscape is shifting. The DOJ's antitrust case against Google is testing the limits of capitalism, profit and competition. It comes as artificial intelligence threatens to upend the internet search business models that allowed Google to dominate for decades. Almost all witnesses who spoke at the remedy portion of the trial seemed to acknowledge the speed of change in the tech world. The potency, promise and problems of AI in the context of existing business models surfaced several weeks ago when Apple executive Eddy Cue made comments from the witness box that briefly sent Google's stock careening. Mr Cue was responding to a question about user habits and the effect that AI is starting to have on search engine companies like Google. Eventually, his comments segued into a reflection of how technology businesses often struggle to adjust. 'People still are going to need toothpaste 20 years from now, 40 years from now. You may not need an iPhone 10 years from now. As crazy as that sounds,' Mr Cue, the senior vice president of services at Apple, told a lawyer representing Alphabet, owner of Google. 'You have to earn it. You have to develop,' he added, explaining that Apple's metrics showed that for the first time ever, overall searches done through Google seemed to have made a slight dip. Those comments reverberated throughout tech and legal communities, with some wondering if a remedy sought by the DOJ might be rendered moot by AI. How people search is changing, as AI swallows up website content and siphons off traffic. Mr Mehta last month sided with the DOJ and ruled that Google's search dominance harmed consumers with less choice. The Justice Department wants Mr Mehta to enact far-reaching penalties that would serve as a warning at other companies. In court on Friday, Mr Dahlquist, the government lawyer, reiterated the DOJ's desire that Google be prohibited from entering into default search agreements with hardware and device makers. He also pushed for strong requirements for Google to share search data and analytics with competitors, Perhaps most consequentially, he said Mr Mehta should require that Google divest Chrome, one of the world's most popular web browsers. 'We're here to make sure this cause and the remedies we propose are able to pry open the competition of this market,' Mr Dahlquist argued. 'We understood the assignment, but rather than provide this court with remedies to promote competition, Google provided milquetoast remedies that maintain status quo,' he continued, adding that Google was acting in bad faith to try to maintain its monopoly. 'Despite Google's efforts to avoid facts, those facts, as they've discovered, are stubborn things,' he added, taking a shot at the one of the world's most powerful tech companies and its phalanx of lawyers, sitting nearby. Google's lawyer, John Schmidtlein, didn't mince words in his response. 'Look at how incredibly invasive and broad they are,' he said, referring to the DOJ's remedies that Google believes 'lack causal connection' to its original motives for bringing the company to court. 'What's the amount of data that a company might need to be able to compete?' he rhetorically asked, criticising one of the DOJ's proposed remedies that Google share search data with potential competitors. Mr Mehta pushed back, saying that ample witnesses told the court that data would help increase their ability to compete, adding that it would be a 'difficult exercise' to try to address Google's criticism of the search data remedy proposal. He also asked the DOJ if AI platforms ChatGPT or Perplexity might be eligible to receive data. 'Not today, but it could eventually,' a DOJ lawyer responded. 'They eventually plan to compete with search companies and search indexes.' Just before the court broke for lunch on Friday, a senior Justice Department official told reporters that the DOJ was pleased with how the process was unfolding, even amid all the scrutiny from Google. 'Look this is a market that's been frozen in place for the better part of two decades," the official said. 'It's going to take a long time to restore competition in the search market.' That senior official also spoke to how the DOJ was trying to factor in fast-changing tech developments going forward as well as the current industry landscape. 'We don't know in the year 2035 what that's going to look like, the judge doesn't know and frankly not even Google knows,' the official explained, pivoting to issue of search data. 'So the game is, how, from a remedial standpoint how do we ensure effective remedies and that's very much about access to search data today and going forward.' Google's own proposed remedies are far lighter than those sought by the DOJ, including a solution that would give users the ability to change their default search provider at least every 12 months. The tech giant has also sought to maintain its ability to have contracts with device manufacturers. 'Browser companies like Apple and Mozilla should continue to have the freedom to do deals with whatever search engine they think is best for their users,' Google said. In late April, Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai made similar arguments to the court, calling proposed remedies 'too broad', and suggesting that fast-pace AI developments would blunt the DOJ's proposals. 'It would be trivial to reverse engineer and effectively build Google search from the outside,' Mr Pichai added. Closing arguments were expected to last throughout the day before Mr Mehta deliberates on a potential remedy.
Al Etihad
8 hours ago
- Al Etihad
Google makes case for keeping Chrome browser
30 May 2025 23:15 Washington (AFP) Google on Friday urged a US judge to reject the notion of making it spin off its Chrome browser to weaken its dominance in online attorneys made their final arguments before US District Court Judge Amit Mehta, who is considering "remedies" to impose after making a landmark decision last year that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in government attorneys have called on Mehta to order Google divest itself of Chrome browser, contending that artificial intelligence is poised to ramp up the tech giant's dominance as the go-to window into the also want Google barred from agreements with partners such as Apple and Samsung to distribute its search tools, which was the focus of the suit against the Silicon Valley internet weeks of testimony ended early in May, with Friday devoted to rival sides parsing points of law and making their arguments before Mehta in a courtroom in Schmidtlein, an attorney for Google, told Mehta that there was no evidence presented showing people would have opted for a different search engine if no exclusivity deals had been in noted that Verizon installed Chrome on smartphones even though the US telecom titan owned Yahoo! search engine and was not bound by a contract with the 100 or so witnesses heard at trial, not one said "if I had more flexibility, I would have installed Bing" search engine from Microsoft, the Google attorney told the judge. 'More flexibility' Department of Justice (DoJ) attorney David Dahlquist countered that Apple, which was paid billions of dollars to make Chrome the default browser on iPhones, "repeatedly asked for more flexibility" but was denied by contends that the United States has gone way beyond the scope of the suit by recommending a spinoff of Chrome, and holding open the option to force a sale of its Android mobile operating system."Forcing the sale of Chrome or banning default agreements wouldn't foster competition," said Cato Institute senior fellow in technology policy Jennifer Huddleston."It would hobble innovation, hurt smaller players, and leave users with worse products."The potential of Chrome being weakened or spun off comes as rivals such as Microsoft, ChatGPT and Perplexity put generative artificial intelligence (AI) to work fetching information from the internet in response to user online search antitrust suit was filed against Google some five years ago, before ChatGPT made its debut, triggering AI is among the tech companies investing heavily to be a leader in AI, and is weaving the technology into search and other online offerings. Kneecap Google? Testimony at trial included Apple vice president of services Eddy Cue revealing that Google's search traffic on Apple devices declined in April for the first time in over two testified that Google was losing ground to AI alternatives like ChatGPT and pressed rival attorneys regarding the potential for Google to share data as proposed by the DoJ in its recommended remedies."We're not looking to kneecap Google," DoJ attorney Adam Severt told the judge."But, we are looking to make sure someone can compete with Google."Schmidtlein contended that the data Google is being asked to share contains much more than just information about people's online searches, saying it would be tantamount to handing over the fruit of investments made over the course of decades."There are countless algorithms that Google engineers have invented that have nothing to do with click and query data," Schmidtlein said. "Their remedy says we want to be on par with all of your ingenuity, and, respectfully your honor, that is not proportional to the conduct of this case.
The National
11 hours ago
- The National
Google antitrust case: Judge weighs remedy effectiveness against fast-moving AI developments
During closing arguments in the penalty portion of the Google antitrust trial on Friday, the judge asked a question about the fast-moving tech world that will likely give pause to legal and business experts. Federal Judge Amit Mehta, who last year found Alphabet-owned Google liable for maintaining a monopoly and exploiting its search sector dominance, wanted to know how search will evolve as he decides the "remedies", or punishment, for Google. 'Does the government believe there's a market for a new search engine to emerge as we think of it today, even with the remedies in place?' he said, interrupting Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyer David Dahlquist's closing arguments. Mr Mehta was referring to artificial intelligence. He implied that as he decides how to correct Google's monopoly, he needs to consider how quickly the tech landscape is shifting. The DOJ's antitrust case against Google is testing the limits of capitalism, profit and competition. It comes as artificial intelligence threatens to upend the internet search business models that allowed Google to dominate for decades. Almost all witnesses who spoke at the remedy portion of the trial seemed to acknowledge the speed of change in the tech world. The potency, promise and problems of AI in the context of existing business models surfaced several weeks ago when Apple executive Eddy Cue made comments from the witness box that briefly sent Google's stock careening. Mr Cue was responding to a question about user habits and the effect that AI is starting to have on search engine companies like Google. Eventually, his comments segued into a reflection of how technology businesses often struggle to adjust. 'People still are going to need toothpaste 20 years from now, 40 years from now. You may not need an iPhone 10 years from now. As crazy as that sounds,' Mr Cue, the senior vice president of services at Apple, told a lawyer representing Alphabet, owner of Google. 'You have to earn it. You have to develop,' he added, explaining that Apple's metrics showed that for the first time ever, overall searches done through Google seemed to have made a slight dip. Those comments reverberated throughout tech and legal communities, with some wondering if a remedy sought by the DOJ might be rendered moot by AI. How people search is changing, as AI swallows up website content and siphons off traffic. Mr Mehta last month sided with the DOJ and ruled that Google's search dominance harmed consumers with less choice. The Justice Department wants Mr Mehta to enact far-reaching penalties that would serve as a warning at other companies. In court on Friday, Mr Dahlquist, the government lawyer, reiterated the DOJ's desire that Google be prohibited from entering into default search agreements with hardware and device makers. He also pushed for strong requirements for Google to share search data and analytics with competitors, Perhaps most consequentially, he said Mr Mehta should require that Google divest Chrome, one of the world's most popular web browsers. 'We're here to make sure this cause and the remedies we propose are able to pry open the competition of this market,' Mr Dahlquist argued. 'We understood the assignment, but rather than provide this court with remedies to promote competition, Google provided milquetoast remedies that maintain status quo,' he continued, adding that Google was acting in bad faith to try to maintain its monopoly. 'Despite Google's efforts to avoid facts, those facts, as they've discovered, are stubborn things,' he added, taking a shot at the one of the world's most powerful tech companies and its phalanx of lawyers, sitting nearby. Google's lawyer, John Schmidtlein, didn't mince words in his response. 'Look at how incredibly invasive and broad they are,' he said, referring to the DOJ's remedies that Google believes 'lack causal connection' to its original motives for bringing the company to court. 'What's the amount of data that a company might need to be able to compete?' he rhetorically asked, criticising one of the DOJ's proposed remedies that Google share search data with potential competitors. Mr Mehta pushed back, saying that ample witnesses told the court that data would help increase their ability to compete, adding that it would be a 'difficult exercise' to try to address Google's criticism of the search data remedy proposal. He also asked the DOJ if AI platforms ChatGPT or Perplexity might be eligible to receive data. 'Not today, but it could eventually,' a DOJ lawyer responded. 'They eventually plan to compete with search companies and search indexes.' Google's own proposed remedies are far lighter than those sought by the DOJ, including a solution that would give users the ability to change their default search provider at least every 12 months. The tech giant has also sought to maintain its ability to have contracts with device manufacturers. 'Browser companies like Apple and Mozilla should continue to have the freedom to do deals with whatever search engine they think is best for their users,' Google said. In late April, Google's chief executive Sundar Pichai made similar arguments to the court, calling proposed remedies 'too broad', and suggesting that fast-pace AI developments would blunt the DOJ's proposals. 'It would be trivial to reverse engineer and effectively build Google search from the outside,' Mr Pichai added. Closing arguments were expected to last throughout the day before Mr Mehta deliberates on a potential remedy.
