Short commentary on the new US National Security Strategy

Why the 2025 National Security Strategy gets AI and technology investment right — and what the U.S. must do to make it operational.

Strategic technology investment is now the fulcrum of American national power — and the 2025 National Security Strategy makes that explicit, but not yet operational enough.

If we are serious about “ensuring U.S. technology and U.S. standards — particularly in AI, biotech, and quantum computing — drive the world forward,” then we have to treat these domains the way earlier generations treated nuclear deterrence and space: as whole of nation, long cycle industrial and security projects, not a loose collection of R&D programs, underwriting legacy companies and venture bets.

That implies three concrete shifts.

First, we need a disciplined technology portfolio, not a wish list. AI, compute, networking, sensing, energy, and advanced manufacturing form one interdependent stack. A policy that overindexes on model development while underinvesting in chips, power, networking, and secure software supply chains is strategically incoherent. A credible strategy must specify where we intend to lead absolutely, where we are content with allied parity, and where we are willing to trade or depend.

Second, the defense industrial base must evolve from a small-batch, platform-centric model to a software-driven, high-iteration, and update-centric ecosystem. The NSS is right to call out the cost asymmetry between cheap offensive drones and expensive defensive systems; the response must be sustained investment in automation, AI-assisted design and testing, and dual-use manufacturing capacity that can surge on demand.

Finally, we must institutionalize public–private collaboration at operational tempo, not conference tempo. The most important emerging technologies now live exclusively in the commercial sector. That requires new mechanisms for classified problem sharing, streamlined security accreditation, and procurement pathways measured in months, not years.

In strategic technologies, time is now the decisive variable. Our investments should be judged less by dollars committed and more by how quickly they change what our operators, analysts, and allies can do. The clock is ticking.

—

This originally was published here in response to the new US National Security Strategy