Resources Filter: By Our Community

Artificial Intelligence, the Complexity Trap, and National Security

 

This essay by Carl O. Pabo, Ph.D., introduces a simple modeling system designed to help us think more clearly about the ways in which the rise of AI will change the world. This qualitative, agent-based model identifies several dozen key societal actors—from tech companies and ordinary citizens to political leaders and AI-based agents —and then analyzes how their actions and interactions are likely to reshape the world over the next 5-10 years.

Dr. Pabo’s model is designed to facilitate scenario analysis and policy development, and it points to four major transformations that lie ahead: 1) AI will facilitate remarkable technical advances, yet will 2) relentlessly intensify competitive pressures (as in cyber attack and cyber defense), 3) accelerate a “crisis of complexity” that already threatens governance, and will 4) change the nature of work and prospects for human employment so rapidly that governments may not be able to respond effectively. Unlike the Industrial Revolution, the benefits of AI may be distributed so unevenly as to risk disruption of the social structures on which progress and national security must ultimately depend.

Deterrence in the Age of Weaponizable Biotechnology

 

Georgetown Journal of International Affairs

“Recent developments in genetic engineering and synthetic biology are enabling unprecedented biological capabilities, offering thrilling medical possibilities. Combined with rapid innovations in emerging technologies such as data-driven machine learning (“artificial intelligence”), nanotechnology, neurotechnology, and robotics, these advances also raise the alarming prospect of genetically engineered bioweapons, or “genetic weapons.” Such weapons would be nearly impossible to deter due to high variability, undetectability, and unattributability. Addressing the threat of genetic warfare will require a concerted and sustained global effort before it becomes an irreversible reality.”

The U.S. Navy and the National Security Establishment: A Critical Assessment

 

“The US Navy is the most formidable naval force in the world—yet, it seems ill-suited to face today’s challenges, especially the rise of China’s maritime power. What explains this paradox? Looking for answers, John Hanley explores how the navy has negotiated its place in the broad national security establishment, especially in the decades since World War II.

Hanley is particularly interested in the evolution of the navy’s organizational and operational dynamics. Tracing how it has adapted to peace and war over time, he sheds light on its relationships within the ecosystem (Congress, the DoD, the defense industry, etc.) in which it operates, and how it has attempted to adapt and respond to shifting national and global environments.

 John T. Hanley, Jr., is nonresident research fellow at the US Naval War College.”

Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder, CO, USA

When Efficiency Harms the Mission

 

“In this third essay of my series, “When Efficiency Harms the Mission,” I delve into the hidden costs of prioritizing efficiency above all else. While efficiency often provides tidy, short-term gains, it can undermine the resilience and adaptability needed to respond successfully in when our strengths are rendered less effective.

The essay challenges us to rethink our obsession with centralized control and quantifiable outcomes, proposing a shift toward a decentralized, competitive approach that embraces longstanding American strengths of diversity, tension, and creativity. Drawing from lessons in war, innovation, and policy, I argue that focusing on mission over function is key to true national security.

This series continues to discuss the idea that we are in a moment of transition and our current emerging problems resist our old solutions. It’s critical that we spend some time reflecting on what frameworks we need to foster resilience in an uncertain world rather that jumping straight to solutions.”

The New Gap in America’s R&D Funding Landscape

 

“The scientific community, including funders across sectors of government, philanthropy, and industry, seem to focus on two versions of success: novelty or scale. They bestow awards and grants on those who show either “revolutionary” new ideas or those who purport to solve a problem for millions that can make someone rich. Anything else falls into this category of incremental and it is dismissed. Somehow harvesting the science we have already invested in to solve individual, local, or regional problems that don’t necessarily lend themselves to market rewards is not incentivized. We owe it to American communities to address longstanding and emerging goals and concerns that may not have clear market drivers and may require diverse approaches, such as challenges of clean water and sanitation; drought, flooding, and wildfires; crumbling infrastructure; preventable chronic diseases; opioid addiction—the list is long. The details of these concerns differ across communities, so solutions need to be localized….”

Reopening The Endless Frontier

 

“The policy innovations that emerged from Bush’s recommendations in 1945 have been very successful in many ways. His prescriptions were ideal for a post-WWII era America, and it is important that sustained funding for foundational science continues. Nevertheless, endlessly perpetuating solutions that were correct at the time does not follow Bush’s true legacy, which was to analyze the current national context, specifically focusing on the U.S. science and technology (S&T) system, create a new institutional landscape that filled gaps in that system, and ultimately provide a global model for others. If Bush were alive today, I believe he would expect the country to analyze this moment, not abide by his advice for the problems of his day. An entirely new contextual assessment is required to develop the framework needed for the social, technological, and security concerns of the 21st century. Following his legacy begins with honestly confronting the contemporary context, as difficult as that may be.”

Cognitive Competition, Conflict, and War: An Ontological Approach

May 2024

Hudson Institute

“The character of war has evolved from the precision strike and stealth regime developed in the late Cold War–era to operations and technologies that target an opponent’s decision-making. This shift has taken many forms, such as gray zone operations, hybrid warfare, little green men, and salami-slicing operations and tactics. Cognitive warfare represents the culmination of this evolution in how countries conduct military operations and calls into question whether traditional kinetic operations alone are necessary to achieve an aggressor’s objectives.”

SMA Speaker Series: Responses Against China’s Coercion in the Indo-Pacific: Developing a Toolkit from the Philippines and Taiwan

 

April 24, 2024

Strategic Multilayer Assessment (SME) General Speaker Session

“China has escalated its aggressive and coercive tactics against smaller and less powerful states as part of its objective to become a regional hegemony. Major targets of Chinese aggression since President Xi Jinping assumed power in 2012 include Taiwan and the Philippines. While both countries face similar forms of Chinese aggression, the tactics employed by China in each case exhibit unique characteristics. Mr. Shattuck delineated the forms of Chinese aggression and Taiwanese responses, while Mr. Garcia provided insights into the Philippines’ experiences.”