Friday News Roundup — December 1st, 2023
Greetings from Washington, we hope you’ve had a good thanksgiving holiday. With December now upon us, year end deadlines come into focus, as does holiday cheer.
In a historic move this morning, the U.S. House of Representatives expelled New York Rep. George Santos as scandals swirled about him. Santos is now the sixth member in the history of the body to be expelled by his fellow representatives.
As jockeying for 2024 comes into focus, the economic picture remains relevant for politics. The 5.2% GDP growth number, along with many other positive metrics, still does not translate into an improved economic outlook for a public still feeling the pain of inflation. Lower rates of inflation provide little sense of relief to consumers wanting lower prices. Should gas prices continue to drop, consumers may feel some relief, but the sense of economic discomfort will not be eased by positive metrics alone.
This week has been marked by remembrance of three great Americans. Earlier in the week, presidents and First Ladies gathered in Plains, Georgia, to bid farewell to former First Lady Rosalynn Carter. Her example of grace, civility, devotion, service, and patriotism will not be forgotten. This week too saw the passing of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. A refugee finding safety in America, Kissinger was driven also by patriotism. Known as a renowned diplomat and strategic thinker, his legacy will be defined, with controversy, by the arc of both Cold War history and U.S.-China relations. This morning we learned of the passing of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, the first woman to sit on the highest court and a lifelong advocate for the rule of law. Also a champion of civics education, Justice O’Connor reflected a love of country as well as the values of the American west and her Arizona she loved.
In this week’s roundup, Ethan Brown breaks down the Pentagon’s guidance and Kory Yueh concludes his analysis of U.S. naval capacity with recommendations. Kory and his classmate Julian Mancillas will be concluding their internships this week. We appreciate their hard work and look forward to what they will accomplish in the future.
New Defense Guidance for AI: Congressional Proposals Lack Function, DoD Strategy Moves to Agile Principles
By Ethan Brown
Cortana-like AI enabling DoD operators remains a distant dream (Google Images)
This week, lawmakers introduced a bill which mandates the Pentagon collaborates closely with Five-Eyes partners on the exchange of future Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. The bill, proposed by Armed Services subcommittee on cybersecurity and information technology Chair Mike Gallagher (R-WI) and ranking democrat Ro Khanna (CA) calls for the appointment of a civilian or ranking officer to implement a working group with partner representation from Australia, Britain, Canada and New Zealand, in order to “develop and coordinate an artificial intelligence initiative among the Five Eyes countries.”
Well and good, there’s nothing negative about policy which doubles-down on collaboration with the United States’ closest allies, especially not when it comes to the emergent and highly volatile advancements in abominable intelligence; apologies for the obscure Warhammer 40k reference, but Sci-Fi has often eloquently offered premonitions and cautionary tales on technology and AI is no different, which is why constructive, functional policies matter now more than ever as machine learning and non-human computation begins to force the evolution of defense enterprises.
Simply, the bill is redundancy and creates a filler position for a lonely DoD official who will be replicating a long-established practice within the Five-Eyes partnership; the alliance already operates a Technology Strategy & Technology Cooperation Program (TTCP) which advances and ensures the equitable exchange and sharing of advanced information and technological developments between the five nations, it’s been ongoing since 1969 to elaborate.
So the effort to ensure collaboration is useful as window dressing, but fails to provide substantive strategy for defense-use of AI as the technology grows. It falls well short of the sweeping mandates under President Biden’s recent Executive Order which deliberately requires safety nets, assurance of American citizens privacy, guardrails on AI development from major developers, promoting American leadership in the field of AI, and ensuring responsible use of the capabilities. While the executive mandate is much broader in scope and intent than the relatively specific and explicit use of AI for defense purposes, the establishment of guardrails and protections on privacy data at national scale serve as an important parameter for such a policy. As it relates to this new bill specifically aimed at the DoD… there just isn’t anything of substance that changes the field or advances constructive AI strategy.
The DoD’s actual, functional, self-generated policies, however, are of greater note and worth investigating, albeit rife with buzzwords as are most DoD policies on complex subjects. In August, the DoD established the generative AI Task Force Lima, organizing factions across the defense enterprise who will determine methods, parameters, and uses of AI in the massive defense machine for future warfighting with one key purpose: harnessing the power of AI to advance the decision-making advantage of the United States in conflict. As noted by Undersecretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks: “Task Force Lima underlines the DoD’s unwavering commitment to leading the charge in AI innovation… [we] must also consider the extent to which our adversaries will employ this technology and seek to disrupt our own use of AI-based solutions.”
Task Force LIMA was established in August, but the new, comprehensive Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence Adoption Strategy is one which has several compelling foundational points, but as noted earlier, is shot through with buzzwords that are short on functional vectors, much like the redundancy of the recent policy bill mandating shared technology across Five-Eyes.
The new strategy sets forth three main strategic goals: ensure quality data, provide insightful analytics and metrics, and develop responsible AI; these are the goals for the use of DoD AI in data-processing and achieving the decision-advantage in project future warfighting domains where information becomes the weapon, disinformation becomes the set- and blocking-piece, and the environment is as much on the radio waves and ionosphere as it is on the beachhead and open seas.
What is notable about the new strategy is in the development cycle for the AI strategy rollout and integration of technology. Project Management (PM) is a huge, emergent component to DoD capabilities, it always has been and always will be (which is why it is useful to get that coveted PMP certification early in life). Traditional PM has followed a linear, objective-process-review-performance indicator-output-sustainment model. The new strategy has wholly invested the “Agile” approach, where the process of developing and integrating technology or deliverables is no longer stove-piped by development, review, then advancement to the next phase of creation. Agile, rather, combines feedback loops, partial development, and realtime adaptation to product creation and advancement. Simply, three or four decades ago, developers would have been granted a “final output” set of requirements by the DoD stakeholder — a new jet, ship, digital platform or combat rifle, for example — and the sourced vendor would have a rigid timeline in which to deliver the final product with limited input from the stakeholder (the DoD) until the ‘final’ version had been delivered. This created a vacuum of feedback where final deliverables often failed to meet the stated objectives, and the defense enterprise was forced to utilize ineffective or partially effective products based on outdated requirements since lifecycles on DoD technology are always years behind current capabilities.
The new Agile strategy seeks to rollout AI capabilities in an iterative fashion, closely investing feedback inputs from DoD stakeholders to ensure the development of the technology commensurate with the needs as set forth in this strategy: develop the machine-learning interface in such a way that the operators and technicians need. It’s a significant, fundamental pivot from traditional methods of developing DoD technology and one that is far more suitable for the creation and implementation of such volatile technology as Artificial Intelligence. The greatest challenge facing the DoD lies not in the iteration development cycle, or the vulnerabilities and risks in developing this futuristic data-management capability, but in recruiting, securing and harnessing the innovation of the most important resource in this endeavor: the people needed to commit to DoD roles for AI creation.
Policies and strategies are key in advancing the American leadership in the AI domain, but securing the people and making/retaining that expertise remains the single greatest challenge and highest hurdle towards implementation.
Part V: Conclusions on the Naval-Industrial Asymmetry Issue & Moving Forward for America
By Kory Yueh
Above: SSN-AUKUS Submarine, BAE Systems. March 14, 2023.
As noted 19th century historian, strategist and U.S. Naval officer Alfred Thayer Mahan noted, “national greatness is inextricably linked to control of the seas.” This philosophy rings especially true for a nation such as the United States, bracketed by the daunting Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Even in today’s sophisticated air and space age, the oceans remain not only our natural defenses, but also our most vital highways. Approximately 90% of the world’s international trade relies on oceanic shipping, and U.S. imports via shipping contribute $1.5 trillion in revenue, and sustain roughly 13 million jobs. Apart from Canada and Mexico, all of America’s foreign allies and partners exist on the opposite side of the ocean. The United States also has 14 territories — each one surrounded by an ocean. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the U.S. Navy is perhaps the most strategically valuable platform for exercising and executing U.S. foreign policy.
Throughout history, civilizations have risen and waned depending on their control of the seas, or lack thereof, which explains the exalted status of the U.S. Navy in terms of ensuring that the United States remains a great power. In our more recent history, the Second World War expressed the incalculable value that mature naval forces bring in the international arena: whether it be in the Battle of the Atlantic or in the Pacific Theater, these conflicts demonstrated that a true post-WWII hegemon will exercise influence and authority through its naval forces.
America’s blue-water navy is vital to ensuring the nation’s global reach and influence, and it enables other instruments of national power — diplomatic, economic and especially military. When world events demand a reaction, it is often the U.S. Navy that moves to the fore. The recent war in the Middle East between Israel and Hamas is just the latest example. In one of its initial responses to the Gazan crisis, the United States deployed two aircraft carrier strike groups to deter further aggression against Israel and to prevent the war from expanding throughout the region. When China threatens Taiwan or impedes freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, it is often the U.S. Navy that deploys in defense of the rules-based international order. When North Korea threatens its neighbors with missile launches, the Navy is often asked to provide regional missile defense with its Aegis destroyers. So has it ever been.
After providing several reports addressing the challenges confronting the U.S. Navy, it is thus only fair that this series concludes with recommendations that could bolster the sea service. Congress has already initiated hearings to investigate shortcomings in the maritime industrial base. The Defense Department has also continually charted the Chinese Navy’s growth and modernization programs. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) naval wing, in conjunction with the Chinese Coast Guard, already wields a significant numerical advantage in the Indo-Pacific, especially in China’s adjacent seas. So where should the U.S. government focus its resources and efforts to better position the U.S. Navy for success?
First, it should be noted that in China, the United States faces a “pacing threat” with the economic and industrial means, and national will, to roll back U.S. naval hegemony in the Indo-Pacific. As I’ve previously written, the United States is in a disadvantageous position: China has focused all of its military modernization and buildup in military forces in its “near abroad,” while the U.S. military has global responsibilities. If history is to be our guide, American resolve will thus continue to be tested by an ascendant great power that views the U.S. military presence in its region as a provocation and a concerted attempt at “containing” Beijing’s ambitions.
One reasonable solution is for federal policymakers to prioritize rejuvenating American naval power. Lawmakers should use their prominent positions to educate the public about the need to modernize U.S. naval forces by incorporating cutting edge technologies, to include artificial intelligence (AI). Even in today’s polarized politics, maintaining a strong U.S. military for national security can be a unifying issue. A robust Navy is essential to maintaining the United States’ status as a superpower. The Department of the Navy has also taken important steps to incentivize communities and workers to support the shipbuilding industry, but more must be done in this regard to supply sufficient manpower in meeting the demands of the maritime industrial base. Still, it is worth noting that the slow bureaucratic pace of American government is a daunting weakness in the industrial arms race against the Chinese industrial base, but for this very reason, it is worth considering AI technology to address the U.S.-China industrial asymmetry threat. In doing so, this venture could open opportunities for joint industrial action that ultimately produces a modernized, sizable, and versatile fleet that is simultaneously capable enough in deterring Chinese aggression within the Indo-Pacific.
The Navy should also continue increasing the role of AI in its operations and weaponry. Recent examples demonstrate the U.S. Navy’s interest in such activities, but this is also a two-edged sword: without proper oversight and security, this technology could easily turn America’s most significant advantage into a critical weakness. The nightmare scenario of an opponent hijacking AI-powered vessels and converting them into hostile warships is a credible threat. Still, the advantages of AI outweigh, in terms of increasing operational efficiency and effectiveness, the potential consequences. For instance, artificial intelligence is already being integrated into unmanned submarines by the Australian Navy, suggesting that the future determinants of geopolitical power will one day be determined by the side with the more powerful and efficient AI-backed military. Instead of focusing valuable time and resources on nuclear-powered submarines with extensive life-support capabilities, it may be possible to produce and deploy many more unmanned vessels to patrol the seas, making up for the numerical disparity between U.S. Navy warships and PLA Navy forces. The financial cost of deploying numerous unmanned vessels would also be far cheaper than deploying manned nuclear submarines — and even more critically, it would take far less time to produce, implement, and deploy such an unmanned force.
The versatility of America’s armed forces has long been recognized as a hallmark of U.S. military strength. Alas, we find ourselves in an era of rapid change. The advent of artificial intelligence technology is a case in point. It would be better for U.S. military forces to embrace this cutting-edge technology than refuse to do so and allow potential adversaries to exploit it first.
In this final analysis, the U.S. Navy is instrumental in protecting American influence and power in the Indo-Pacific. To maintain that status, the United States will have to revitalize its maritime industrial base, and rapidly integrate cutting-edge technologies like AI. Congress must also do its part, with lawmakers making the case for a strong Navy to local constituents to build political support and devoting the resources necessary to maintain America’s preeminence on the high seas. I lack the sufficient space and time to provide a greater explanation for the alternative solutions–but I rest assured in my conviction that the United States should harness secure AI technology to ensure its future security.
NEWS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED
Putin Signs Russia’s Largest National Budget, Bolstering Military Spending
By Kory Yueh
Earlier this week, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a national budget which will increase Russia’ military spending by 25%, dedicating a historically record amount to defense as the Kremlin continues waging a war in Ukraine. Specifically, the Russian president approved 36.6 trillion rubles ($415 billion) with an anticipated deficit of 1.595 trillion rubles ($9.5 billion) for the Russian economy. The passage of the budget is intended as a deliberate response against international sanctions pressuring Russia to withdraw from Ukraine; and yet, despite the announcement of this budget, some parts of the budget remain classified. Analysts have already begun to predict that short-term factors such as record low unemployment and higher wages will insulate the Russian economy, but in the long-term experts predict the Russian economy will experience continued turbulence.
US, UK and a Dozen More Countries Unveil Pact to Make AI ‘Secure by Design’
By Kory Yueh
Last week, the United States, the United Kingdom, and more than a dozen other countries revealed what has been described as the world’s first international document concerning artificial intelligence (AI) security and “secure-by-design” AI design processes. The 20-page document was signed by a total of 18 countries and is non-binding, but it sets a precedent for written recommendations and guidelines that can shape future AI oversight development.. The agreement specifically addresses cybersecurity and seeks to prevent rogue actors from obtaining sophisticated AI technology for nefarious aims. Despite this forum, the ethical usage of AI continues to be a controversial issue because no international agreement yet exists on regulating AI development and usage. Europe remains ahead of the United States in terms of drafting AI regulations, and despite strong calls from the Biden administration, a highly polarized U.S. Congress has made little to no progress on AI regulation.
Kory Yueh is a student intern at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.
China Calls for Ceasefire in Myanmar While Continuing Live-Fire Border Drills
By Julian Mancillas
On Sunday November 26th, China called for a ceasefire in Myanmar after a coalition of ethnic insurgent groups recently seized crossings on the Myanmar-China border. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) newspaper the PLA Daily stated that China would hold live fire drills on its side of the border with the intention of “testing the mobility, border control abilities and firepower capabilities of the military units so that the People’s Liberation Army is ready for any emergency.” The response indicates the Chinese government’s wariness that the conflict in Myanmar will spill over into their country, with police having already used tear gas to drive away people gathering close to the border fence. Those concerns seem warranted, as the Burmese-Chinese border is rife with drug smuggling and human trafficking, and cyberattacks against Chinese citizens from the area are also a major concern. The fighting in Myanmar has also halted legal trade with China in manufactured goods and agricultural products, which Myanmar depends on economically. With the usual avenues of trade closed and China on high alert for any cross border incursions, it’s not clear what happens next in Myanmar’s civil war.
Currency Clashes Cause Trouble for Russia’s Oil Trade with India
By Julian Mancillas
One of Russia’s most crucial oil trade routes seems to be in danger due to disagreements about paying in currencies other than U.S. dollars. The dispute involves India, which since the imposition of Western sanctions due to the invasion of Ukraine has been Russia’s biggest buyer of seaborne oil. Since July, India has insisted on paying for Russian oil with Indian rupees, which Russian oil suppliers will not accept due to informal guidance from Russia’s central bank. According to the Russian central bank, since rupees are a non-convertible currency with little value outside of India, and Russia imports very few Indian goods, receiving them as payment for oil deals is pointless. Russian officials and oil executives have apparently pressed Indian buyers to pay in Chinese yuan, a currency that is much more useful to Russia as it imports large quantities of goods from China. That request is a non-starter for India, however, which refuses to use the currency of its main regional rival. As a temporary solution Russia chose to pay India in a combination of the Chinese yuan, Hong Kong dollar, and UAE dirham. This workaround, however, is not sustainable given Washington’s tougher stance on Russian oil exports, and the implementation of a price cap that has led to many UAE banks to tighten controls on clients involved in Russian crude. With increased restrictions and India’s commitment to pay in rupees, it remains to be seen whether the impasse spells major trouble with Russia’s oil exports in the near future.
Julian Mancillas is a student intern at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.
The views of authors are their own and not that of CSPC.