#FactCheck - Old Video Misleadingly Claimed as Footage of Iranian President Before Crash

At Semicon India 2025 held recently, the Prime Minister declared, “when the chips are down, you can bet on India”.  The event showcased the country’s first indigenous microprocessor, Vikram, developed by ISRO’s Semiconductor Lab, and announced that commercial chip production will begin by the end of 2025. India aims to become a global player in semiconductor production, and build self-reliance in a world where global supply chains are shifting rapidly. 

Why Semiconductors Matter

Semiconductors power almost everything around us, from laptops and air conditioners to cars and even the tiniest gadget we hardly notice . They’ve rightly been called the “oil of the digital age” because our entire digital world depends on them. But the global supply chain for chips is heavily concentrated. Taiwan alone makes over 60% of the world’s semiconductors and nearly 90% of the most advanced ones. Rising tensions between China and Taiwan have only shown how fragile and risky this dependence can be for the rest of the world. For India, building its own semiconductor base is not just about technology, it is about economic security and reduced dependence on imports.

India’s Push: The Numbers and Projects

The government has committed nearly US$18 billion across 10 projects, making it one of the country’s largest industrial bets in decades. Under the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, ₹76,000 crore (about US$9.1 billion) was set aside, of which most has already been allocated.

Key developments include:

• Vikram processor – developed at ISRO’s Semiconductor Lab, fabricated on 180nm technology.
• CG Power facility in Sanand, Gujarat – launched in 2024, scaling chip assembly and testing.
• Micron’s investment – ₹22,500+ crore in Gujarat for packaging and testing.
• Tata Electronics–PSMC partnership – ₹91,000 crore tie-up with Taiwan’s Powerchip for fabs.

The domestic market, valued at US$38 billion in 2023, is expected to touch US$100–110 billion by 2030 if growth sustains.

The Technology Gap

While the Vikram chip, a 32 bit microprocessor, is a proud milestone, it highlights the technology gap  India faces. The chip was fabricated using a 180nm CMOS process, a process that was cutting-edge back in the early 2000s. Today, companies like TSMC and Samsung are already producing 3nm chips for smartphones and AI servers, whereas those like Nvidia and Apple have developed chips 2ith 64-bit processing capabilities.

This means India's main focus, to become self-reliant in the mature end of the spectrum useful for space, defense, and automotives and electronics, is far from the global cutting edge. Bridging this gap will require both time and deep technical expertise.

Talent and Design Strengths

On the positive side, India already contributes around 20% of global semiconductor design talent. Two advanced design centers—one in Noida and another in Bengaluru—are working on 3nm designs. The government’s Design Linked Incentive scheme has cleared 20+ projects to nurture startups in chip design.

Over 60,000 engineers have been trained under various programs, but scaling this to the hundreds of thousands needed for fabs remains a challenge. Unlike software development, semiconductor fabrication demands highly specialised skills in process engineering, yield optimization, and supply chain logistics.

Lessons from Global Players

Countries like Taiwan, South Korea, and the US didn’t build their chip industries overnight. Taiwan’s TSMC spent decades and billions of dollars mastering yield rates and building trust with clients. The US recently passed the CHIPS and Science Act to revive domestic production, while the EU has its own Chips Act. Japan, too, has pledged billions, including ¥10 trillion in cooperation with India.

These examples show that success depends not just on funding , but also on harmony between government and private players, consistent execution, ecosystem building, and global partnerships.

The Challenges Ahead

India’s ambitions face several hurdles:

• Capital intensity – A single leading-edge fab costs US$10–20 billion, and requires constant upgrades.
• Supply chain complexity – Hundreds of chemicals, gases, and precision tools are needed, many of which India doesn’t yet produce domestically.
• Technology transfer – Advanced lithography machines (from ASML in the Netherlands, for example) are tightly controlled and not easily available.
• Execution risks – Moving from announcements to commercially viable fabs with competitive yields is where many countries have stumbled.

The Way Forward

India has big ambitions in the field of semi-conductor design and manufacturing, with the goal of becoming a major  global exporter instead of importer. The country appears to be adopting a step-by-step approach, starting with assembly, testing, and mature-node fabs, while simultaneously investing in design, research, and talent. Every successful global power in this industry first mastered older nodes before advancing to cutting-edge levels.

At the same time, international collaborations with players like Micron, Tata-PSMC, and Japan will be critical for technology transfer and capacity building. If India can combine its engineering talent, rising domestic demand, and government backing with the PLI scheme, and drive global collaborations, the outlook can be promising. 

Conclusion

India’s semiconductor story is just beginning, but the direction is clear. The Vikram processor and investment announcement at Semicon 2025 shows the intent of the government. The hard part now lies ahead: moving from prototypes to large-scale production and globally competitive fabs in an industry that demands substantial investment, flawless execution, and years of patience.

Yet the stakes couldn’t be higher. Semiconductors will shape the future of economies and national security . If India plays its cards right by nurturing talent, innovating and researching, and driving global partnerships,  the dream of becoming a global semiconductor hub may well move from ambition to reality.

‍

References 

• https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/when-chips-are-down-bet-on-india-pm-narendra-modis-big-semiconductor-push-6539317 
• https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/what-is-vikram-32-bit-chip-presented-to-pm-modi-at-semicon-india-2025-2780582-2025-09-02#
• https://www.visionofhumanity.org/the-worlds-dependency-on-taiwans-semiconductor-industry-is-increasing/ 
• https://m.economictimes.com/tech/artificial-intelligence/tata-electronics-and-powerchip-semiconductor-manufacturing-corporation-to-build-indias-first-semiconductor-fab/articleshow/113694273.cms 
• https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/10-trillion-yen-in-10-years-japan-pledges-big-investment-in-india-125082901564_1.html 
• https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2023/06/vulnerabilities-in-the-semiconductor-supply-chain_f4de7491/6bed616f-en.pdf 
• https://techwireasia.com/2025/09/semiconductor-india-commercial-production-2025/ 

‍

Executive Summary

A video is being widely shared on social media showing soldiers carrying coffins with full military honours. Users are claiming that the footage shows the bodies of American soldiers who were killed in the war with Iran being brought back to the United States.

However, research by the CyberPeacefound the viral claim to be misleading. Our research  revealed that the video has no connection to the recent Iran-Israel conflict. The footage actually dates back to December 2025, when an Islamic State gunman in Syria killed two US soldiers and a US civilian.

Following that incident, the bodies of the victims were transported with military honours, and the ceremony was recorded in the viral video. The clip is now being circulated online with a false claim.

‍

Claim

‍

On March 1, 2026, an Instagram user shared the viral video claiming that it shows the bodies of American soldiers returning to the US after being killed in the war against Iran. The caption of the post reads: “Bodies of American soldiers martyred against Iran are returning to the United States. War always brings destruction, which we are now witnessing.”

‍

The link to the post and its archived version can be seen below.

• https://www.facebook.com/reel/2414852578967604 
• https://archive.ph/Dew3L 

‍

Fact check

‍

To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and performed a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the search, we found the full version of the video in a report published by BBC on December 18, 2025. This confirms that the footage predates the current developments.

• https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cvg101ey91lo 

‍

According to the BBC report, US President Donald Trump attended a dignified transfer ceremony for two members of the US National Guard and a US civilian who were killed in Syria. The somber ceremony took place at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, United States. The US Central Command (Centcom) stated that the two soldiers and a civilian interpreter were killed in an ambush carried out by an Islamic State (IS) gunman in Syria. The US Army identified the two soldiers as Sgt. Edgar Brian Torres-Tovar (25) of Des Moines and Sgt. William Nathaniel Howard (29) of Marshalltown. A US civilian interpreter, Ayad Mansoor Sakat, was also killed in the attack. Officials said that three other service members were injured during the attack, and the gunman was engaged and killed. Syria’s state media also reported that two Syrian security personnel were injured in the incident.

Further research  led us to a report published on the News Nation YouTube channel on December 18, 2025, which also featured the same footage related to the incident.

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnD5wJNpN2c 

‍

‍

Conclusion

Our research  found that the viral video is not related to the recent Iran-Israel conflict. The footage dates back to December 2025, when two US soldiers and a US civilian were killed in an Islamic State attack in Syria. The video shows the dignified transfer of their remains and is now being shared on social media with a misleading claim.

‍

Modern international trade heavily relies on data transfers for the exchange of digital goods and services. User data travels across multiple jurisdictions and legal regimes, each with different rules for processing it. Since international treaties and standards for data protection are inadequate, states, in an effort to protect their citizens' data, have begun extending their domestic privacy laws beyond their borders. However, this opens a Pandora's box of legal and administrative complexities for both, the data protection authorities and data processors. The former must balance the harmonization of domestic data protection laws with their extraterritorial enforcement, without overreaching into the sovereignty of other states. The latter must comply with the data privacy laws in all states where it collects, stores, and processes data. While the international legal community continues to grapple with these challenges, India can draw valuable lessons to refine the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP) in a way that effectively addresses these complexities.

Why Extraterritorial Application? 

Since data moves freely across borders and entities collecting such data from users in multiple states can misuse it or use it to gain an unfair competitive advantage in local markets, data privacy laws carry a clause on their extraterritorial application. Thus, this principle is utilized by states to frame laws that can ensure comprehensive data protection for their citizens, irrespective of the data’s location.  The foremost example of this is the European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), 2016,  which applies to any entity that processes the personal data of its citizens, regardless of its location. Recently, India has enacted the DPDP Act of 2023, which includes a clause on extraterritorial application.

The Extraterritorial Approach: GDPR and DPDP Act

The GDPR is considered the toughest data privacy law in the world and sets a global standard in data protection. According to Article 3, its provisions apply not only to data processors within the EU but also to those established outside its territory, if they offer goods and services to and conduct behavioural monitoring of data subjects within the EU. The enforcement of this regulation relies on heavy penalties for non-compliance in the form of fines up to €20 million or 4% of the company’s global turnover, whichever is higher, in case of severe violations. As a result, corporations based in the USA, like Meta and Clearview AI, have been fined over  €1.5 billion and €5.5 million respectively, under the GDPR. 

Like the GDPR, the DPDP Act extends its jurisdiction to foreign companies dealing with personal data of data principles within Indian territory under section 3(b). It has a similar extraterritorial reach and prescribes a penalty of up to Rs 250 crores in case of breaches. However, the Act or DPDP Rules, 2025, which are currently under deliberation, do not elaborate on an enforcement mechanism through which foreign companies can be held accountable. 

Lessons for India’s DPDP on Managing Extraterritorial Application 

1. Clarity in Definitions: GDPR clearly defines ‘personal data’, covering direct information such as name and identification number,  indirect identifiers like location data, and, online identifiers that can be used to identify the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural, or social identity of a natural person. It also prohibits revealing special categories of personal data like religious beliefs and biometric data to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of the subjects. On the other hand, the DPDP Act/ Rules define ‘personal data’ vaguely, leaving a broad scope for Big Tech and ad-tech firms to bypass obligations. 
2. International Cooperation: Compliance is complex for companies due to varying data protection laws in different countries. The success of regulatory measures in such a scenario depends on international cooperation for governing cross-border data flows and enforcement. For DPDP to be effective, India will have to foster cooperation frameworks with other nations. 
3. Adequate Safeguards for Data Transfers: The GDPR regulates data transfers outside the EU via pre-approved legal mechanisms such as standard contractual clauses or binding corporate rules to ensure that the same level of protection applies to EU citizens’ data even when it is processed outside the EU. The DPDP should adopt similar safeguards to ensure that Indian citizens’ data is protected when processed abroad.
4. Revised Penalty Structure: The GDPR mandates a penalty structure that must be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. The supervisory authority in each member state has the power to impose administrative fines as per these principles, up to an upper limit set by the GDPR. On the other hand, the DPDP’s penalty structure is simplistic and will disproportionately impact smaller businesses. It must take into regard factors such as nature, gravity, and duration of the infringement, its consequences, compliance measures taken, etc.
5. Governance Structure: The GDPR envisages a multi-tiered governance structure comprising of   

• National-level Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) for enforcing national data protection laws and the GDPR, 
• European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) for monitoring the processing of personal data by EU institutions and bodies,  
• European Commission (EC) for developing GDPR legislation
• European Data Protection Board (EDPB) for enabling coordination between the EC, EDPS, and DPAs

In contrast, the Data Protection Board (DPB) under DPDP will be a single, centralized body overseeing compliance and enforcement. Since its members are to be appointed by the Central Government, it raises questions about the Board’s autonomy and ability to apply regulations consistently. Further, its investigative and enforcement capabilities are not well defined.

Conclusion 

The protection of the human right to privacy ( under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) in today’s increasingly interconnected digital economy warrants international standard-setting on cross-border data protection. In the meantime, States relying on the extraterritorial application of domestic laws is unavoidable. While India’s DPDP takes measures towards this, they must be refined to ensure clarity regarding implementation mechanisms. They should push for alignment with data protection laws of other States, and account for the complexity of enforcement in cases involving extraterritorial jurisdiction. As India sets out to position itself as a global digital leader, a well-crafted extraterritorial framework under the DPDP Act will be essential to promote international trust in India’s data governance regime.

Sources

• https://gdpr-info.eu/art-83-gdpr/ 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-150/ 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-51/ 
• https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/06/2bf1f0e9f04e6fb4f8fef35e82c42aa5.pdf 
• https://www.eqs.com/compliance-blog/biggest-gdpr-fines/#:~:text=ease%20the%20burden.-,At%20a%20glance,In%20summary 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/art-3-gdpr/ 
• https://www.legal500.com/developments/thought-leadership/gdpr-v-indias-dpdpa-key-differences-and-compliance-implications/#:~:text=Both%20laws%20cover%20'personal%20data,of%20personal%20data%20as%20sensitive. 

‍