Priorities and Policy...Quantum and AI

Context gives us both the means to understand actions we observe and to anticipate potential changes in the future. The combination of understanding what we see and to better predict what is around the corner is powerful and makes understanding context critical for organizations across the public and private sectors. However, what context matters to what organization is in the middle of a change itself and it has never been more important to get the context right. Today, the context that matters across all sectors is how emerging technology is shaping our geopolitical environment. Nation-states are making significant investments in technologies like quantum, artificial intelligence (AI), outer space, and cyber capabilities that are shaping our world. They are also creating policies that will drive government actions for decades to come. China has made no secret of its intent to become the dominant world AI power and with that statement comes significant momentum. For its part, the US government has released a flurry of emerging technology policy documents in recent years but still lacks a central vision for how to use emerging technologies to enhance its missions. The public and private sectors each have vital pieces of the solution to how the US maintains its national security and continues to lead in emerging technology development, but first a common ground must be reached. That common ground is the context in which both operate regardless of how value creation is defined. This whitepaper puts forward a vision for how the current geopolitical era is creating the critical context that is driving decision making across organizations and how this context can be the uniting factor to bring the full weight of US innovation and ingenuity to a common goal. It begins with the context.

‍

Since World War II, the US has found itself in four distinct geopolitical eras that drove its decision making, commitment of resources, and expenditure of treasure. The first is easily identifiable as the Cold War. The US and Soviet Union were undisputed global hegemons presiding over a bipolar world where orbits developed around each center of gravity. The competition was over views of society, government, and economics and this dynamic drove decisions across private and public sectors for decades. Following the fall of the Soviet Union, the US enjoyed a relatively brief period of singular dominance usually called “the unipolar moment” where it alone was the global hegemon and its priorities reflected this dynamic. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the US and the world entered a new period defined by the rise of non-state actors. For twenty years, the US focused nearly exclusively on the War on Terror, bringing enormous resources with it. This drove US interactions with international partners, domestic policies, and more impacting the lives of millions of people globally.  

‍

In the same way that earlier geopolitical eras have defined the context for organizations across the private and public sectors, today is no different. What makes this era more difficult is that there has not been a singular event that defined its beginning and the end of its predecessor. Even so, few would argue that the geopolitical era in 2023 is different from that of 2007 or even later. A phrase often used but rarely defined is “great power competition.” Great power competition (GPC) is generally used to describe the new near-peer adversary dynamics that are dominating geopolitics today. However, in many uses of the term, it refers only to the “bigness” of China or the unruly behavior of Russia or other adversary nation-states. None of those contexts provides a useful definition that can help drive the decisions and resource allocation of organizations. Rather, the question should surround what is being competed over. Looking at trends of policy making around the world combined with private investment and market trends the quantity under competition is emerging technology, specifically the research and development (R&D), operationalization, and monetization of emerging technologies. As nation-states position themselves to be leaders in technologies such as quantum, AI, space, and telecommunications, private companies in the West will be increasingly affected by changes in the geopolitical landscape. With emerging technologies redefining strategic assets around the world, it is vital that organizations focus on emerging technology as a discrete profession in the same way that organizations shifted to recognize cyber as a discrete profession over 30 years ago.  

‍

It may seem hard to believe today but there was a time when organizations had to be convinced of the value of spending money on cyber. Cyber, technical or non-technical, was not a recognized profession or field of study until world events shifted to make it a priority. Universities began offering degrees and certifications to build a cyber workforce that cut across multiple professions. We are in the same moment for emerging technology today. World events are driving the development of an emerging technology workforce that is separate from cyber professionals. The need for cyber professionals will not wane and efforts are rightly underway in the US to improve and grow the cyber workforce. However, issues like AI, quantum, and outer space are quite different from issues like ransomware. Emerging technologies indeed have a cyber nexus but the opportunities and threats that come with them extend beyond cyber. In response to this reality, a limited number of universities are offering courses in emerging technology with a few starting to create emerging technology tracks within existing degree programs. Federal Cabinet departments in the US are creating emerging technology policy offices and emerging technology intelligence analysis shops to support them. Examples of this include DHS and DOD among others. In the spring of 2023, the Department of Justice and Department of Commerce announced a Disruptive Technology Strike Force aimed at cracking down on state-sponsored intellectual property theft in ten major US cities. These actions showcase a recognition of the value of emerging technology as an issue area, area for education, and priority for law enforcement resources. And this is only the beginning.  

‍

There is a straight line that connects private sector innovation and market share with national and homeland security when it comes to emerging technology. In the West, the chief innovators are in the private sector, and they are the targets of intellectual property theft by actors with nation-state resources. The vector for the theft may be cyber but that’s the domain in which it is taking place, not the goal of the action. The goal is to gain an advantage by targeting the strategic assets of competitor nations, in this case the research and development and technical knowledge at the core of the US innovation ecosystem. Increasingly creative and aggressive espionage attempts against technology firms large and small are underway and the playing field is not even. The US prides itself on its startup ecosystem and entrepreneurial culture that has proven time and again that it is capable of creating and scaling technological innovations. The most prominent example of that ecosystem is in Silicon Valley, but others are emerging such as robotics in Pittsburgh, PA. Innovators and entrepreneurs have access to resources they need in places like these in the form of investment capital, universities that train the next generation of innovators, and more. However, that ecosystem is under threat if a constant state of cyber war and a proliferation of non-traditional collectors gives our adversaries a distinct advantage while eroding the attractiveness of innovating in the US ecosystem. The innovation ecosystem is central to our national, economic, and homeland security and is the convergence point for the public and private sectors plus a new generation of emerging technology professionals to cooperate under a common contextual framework.

‍

A robust and attractive innovation ecosystem has a few distinct characteristics that are neither the full responsibility of the public nor private sectors to grow and maintain. At the strategic level, a strong innovation ecosystem should include and prioritize:

‍

1. Digital Creative Industry

2. Advanced Manufacturing

3. Strategic Investment

4. Technical Standards Development

‍

These strategic components create an environment where innovators have access to capital and to a robust digital market while ensuring an innovative future by prioritizing international standards making and providing access to the development of advanced materials. In support of the above strategic components, an innovation ecosystem should also include:  

‍

1. International Partnerships

2. Supply Chain Protections

3. Workforce Talent Pipeline

4. Intellectual Property Protection

5. Cybersecurity

‍

These components help to protect and sustain innovation. The removal or disruption of any of these components reduces the efficacy of the innovation ecosystem. Both government and private sector organizations have roles to plan in ensuring the innovation ecosystem remains robust and attractive. Likewise, both have incentives to take action to protect it in the form of economic incentives, national resilience, and national security. To do it effectively, organizations across both sectors must prioritize emerging technology as a distinct discipline that requires personnel who cut across the policy and technology worlds.  

‍

Context matters. The context for the world today is that emerging technology is a strategic asset over which nation-states are competing. That dynamic is driving how policies are written, how products go to market, and how resources are allocated. This reality demands organizations begin to look at emerging technology in a way that mirrors the evolution of cyber. Emerging technology policies, implementation, and dedicated professionals are today important factors to the success of your organization, factors that are on a sharp crescendo. No matter how you define your mission or what success looks like, you will be impacted by emerging technologies and bringing in the expertise to help you make sense of these factors is directly tied to continued success and value creation.

‍