Key Takeaways
1. The National Security Machine is Outdated and Over-Focused
The National Security Act of 1947, designed after World War II, gave us the basic system we still use today to determine threats to the United States and how to respond to them.
Antiquated architecture. The foundational structure of the US national security apparatus, including the Department of Defense, CIA, and National Security Council, largely dates back to 1947. While adapted over time, notably after 9/11, this system was primarily built for the Cold War's panorama of global threats and later retooled to zoom in on terrorism. This historical design, akin to a "1947 Chevy," struggles to keep pace with the speed and complexity of 21st-century dangers.
Costly unpreparedness. Despite an annual budget exceeding $1.25 trillion, the government frequently appears unprepared for critical issues. This raises fundamental questions about the definition of national security, how existential threats are identified, and whether success is measured in lives saved, territory protected, or economic damage averted. The focus on traditional military threats often overshadows the need for an "industrial-strength lifesaving machine" to address non-kinetic dangers.
Generals fight past wars. A common truism suggests military leaders are best at preparing for the last war, and institutions often follow suit. The post-9/11 overhaul, for instance, narrowly focused on terrorism, inadvertently "tuning out" a vast array of new and emerging threats. This reactive cycle means the nation is constantly playing catch-up, struggling to adapt its expensive machinery to a rapidly evolving threat landscape.
2. The "Zoom" on Terrorism Blinded the US to Emerging Threats
But that most recent overhaul, following the attacks of September 11, 2001, retooled the national security machine to focus mainly on one major threat—terrorism.
Narrowed vision. The post-9/11 era saw the US national security machine undergo a significant overhaul, with institutions like the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center created to combat terrorism. This intense, "zoom-like" focus on al-Qaeda and its affiliates, while understandable given the tragedy, came at the strategic cost of neglecting a vast array of other rising dangers.
Strategic miscalculation. Key figures, including former National Counterterrorism Center director Michael Leiter, acknowledged that defining terrorism as an existential threat on par with nuclear arsenals was an overreaction. This disproportionate attention diverted resources and expertise from critical areas such as:
- Cyber warfare
- The rise of China
- A resurgent Russia
- Global pandemics
- Climate change impacts
Unforeseen consequences. The preoccupation with "Forever Wars" in the Middle East consumed immense resources and leadership attention for two decades. This strategic cul-de-sac meant that when new, non-traditional threats like digits, storms, and germs emerged, the US found itself ill-prepared, lacking the mechanisms and foresight to address problems that could not be contained by oceans or border walls.
3. China's Rise: A Strategic Challenge Met with Delayed Action
For the next twenty years there was a lot of talk about China in America’s military circles, but not a lot of action.
Ignoring early warnings. Despite early 1990s wargames by Pentagon strategist Andrew Marshall predicting China's ability to frustrate US military plans in the Pacific, and China's own aggressive military modernization following the 1995-96 Taiwan Strait Crisis, the US response was slow. The prevailing "time is on our side" mentality, coupled with the post-9/11 focus on the Middle East, meant a coherent strategy for China was delayed.
Economic entanglement vs. security threat. For decades, the US business community viewed China primarily as a market and manufacturing hub, often muting calls for a more assertive military posture. This changed around 2014 with Xi Jinping's "Made in China 2025" initiative and rampant intellectual property theft, which alienated US businesses. This shift removed a significant constituency that had previously advocated for restraint in US policy toward China.
Critical vulnerabilities exposed. The "pivot to the Pacific" under Obama was undermined by fiscal cuts and ongoing Middle East crises. China capitalized on this distraction, rapidly developing capabilities like hypersonic missiles and fortifying the South China Sea. The vulnerability of Taiwan's TSMC, a single point of failure for the global semiconductor supply, now presents an "extraordinary import" and a potential nuclear flashpoint, a risk the US never faced during the Cold War.
4. Russia's Aggression: Warnings Ignored, Underestimated, and Misunderstood
Putin was saying, ‘You have to respect our desire to dominate and control and maintain our hegemony over these states in the former Soviet Union.’
Public declarations dismissed. Vladimir Putin's 2007 Munich speech, a scathing indictment of US global overreach and NATO expansion, was a clear public warning of his intent to challenge global security. Despite its bluntness, Washington largely dismissed it as rhetoric, failing to grasp Putin's deep-seated grievances and his 1980s KGB mindset focused on restoring Russia's sphere of influence.
Decimated expertise. After the Cold War, US intelligence and diplomatic expertise on Russia dwindled significantly, with resources redirected to counterterrorism and other regions. This left a smaller, less experienced cadre watching the Kremlin, leading to repeated strategic surprises such as:
- The 2008 invasion of Georgia
- The 2014 annexation of Crimea and intervention in Donbas
- The 2016 election interference
"Gray zone" warfare. The US, accustomed to an "on/off switch" of war or peace, struggled to comprehend Russia's comfort in a perpetual "in-between" state of conflict. Putin's judo-like approach, using covert operations, disinformation, and cyberattacks to exploit Western vulnerabilities, was not adequately countered. The failure to impose significant costs for these actions emboldened Moscow, culminating in the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
5. Germs: An Existential Threat Undermined by "Panic and Neglect"
I would posit that one of the crazy things that happened early on in this pandemic is that people like my successor just never imagined that mother nature could be a worse actor than a bioterrorist.
Fragmented response. The US public health system, including the CDC, was not designed as a crisis action machine, leading to "dramatic, pretty public mistakes" during COVID-19. Despite warnings about pandemic influenza since the Clinton administration, the system suffered from "boom-and-bust cycles of funding" and a lack of clear authority, resulting in slow, fragmented responses.
Bioterrorism preparedness gaps. While the post-9/11 era saw increased attention to bioterrorism, leading to a national stockpile of vaccines and the creation of BARDA, this focus often overshadowed naturally occurring pandemics. Experts like former Army Colonel Jerry Jaax warned that preparedness had waned, with vaccines expiring and public acceptance of controversial vaccinations remaining low, as seen with COVID-19.
Future threats loom. The $1.25 billion National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF) in Kansas, designed to study Biosafety Level 4 pathogens, is a crucial step but faces delays and funding challenges. The "attribution problem" in biological attacks, coupled with the potential for AI-enabled "personalized warfare" and "human-scale extinction" scenarios (Eric Schmidt), highlights a terrifying future for which the US is "not prepared."
6. Digits: The New Battlefield Where Human Error is the Weakness
What’s interesting about cyberattacks is they oftentimes require human error in order for them to land right.
Mogadishu, not Eden. The internet, born from Cold War efforts to ensure secure communications, has always been a chaotic "Mogadishu" rather than a "digital Eden." Early cyber espionage, like "The Cuckoo's Egg," foreshadowed a future where information could be stolen and systems compromised, often exploiting human carelessness rather than just technical vulnerabilities.
Evolving threats, static response. From "cyber Pearl Harbor" warnings to election interference and ransomware attacks, the nature of digital threats constantly evolves. However, the US government's response has been hampered by:
- Bureaucratic slowness ("human speed" vs. "machine speed")
- Fractionated responsibilities across dozens of agencies
- Lack of a clear "belly button" or single authority
- Difficulty in attributing attacks for effective deterrence
The "Greatest Transfer of Wealth." Beyond direct attacks, the "greatest transfer of wealth in human history" is occurring through intellectual property theft, largely from China. This "war of conquest" fought with digits, not armies, has acquired enormous wealth without a shot fired. The advent of quantum computing threatens to break existing encryption, while AI could enable devastating, targeted cyberattacks, posing "completely unexplored" proliferation problems.
7. Drones: An American Monopoly Lost, a Domestic Threat Unaddressed
We just shot ourselves in the foot over a decade of preventing the US export of Predators and Reapers around the world.
Self-inflicted proliferation. The US, once a leader in drone technology, inadvertently accelerated its proliferation by restricting exports of advanced drones like Predators and Reapers to allies. This policy, driven by the Missile Technology Control Regime, pushed partners like Jordan to acquire inferior drones from adversaries like China, effectively "facilitating the actions of our adversaries."
Homeland vulnerability. The 2015 White House gyrocopter incident, though a "chucklehead event," exposed a critical vulnerability: the lack of clear authority and technology to counter hostile drones in domestic airspace. With millions of recreational and commercial drones expected by 2024, and evidence of terrorist groups experimenting with armed or poisoned drones, the threat to critical infrastructure and public events is "just a matter of time."
"Who is in charge here?" Despite the 2018 Preventing Emerging Threats Act granting some federal agencies authority to counter drones, a "hodge-podge" of overlapping jurisdictions and civil liberties concerns (e.g., wiretapping laws) leaves a dangerous gap. The Biden administration's 2022 action plan aims to renew expiring authorities and expand capabilities, but the challenge remains to build a cohesive "mesh of shared goals" across federal, state, local, and private sectors.
8. Storms: Climate Change as the Ultimate "Threat Multiplier"
Climate change is an existential threat to our nation’s security, and the Department of Defense must act swiftly and boldly to take on this challenge and prepare for damage that cannot be avoided.
Existential and cascading risks. While often debated politically, the military views climate change as an "existential threat" that directly impacts its ability to operate. Extreme weather events—wildfires, floods, rising sea levels, and heat—are damaging critical installations, hindering training, and increasing operational risks. This "threat multiplier" exacerbates instability in fragile regions, driving mass migration and conflict over resources.
Second and third-order effects. Beyond direct military impacts, climate change reshapes the global security landscape, creating geopolitical flashpoints. Droughts fueled the Syrian civil war, and water shortages spark unrest in the Middle East and Africa. World Bank projections anticipate millions of climate-related migrants by 2050, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, straining governments and increasing the risk of conflict.
A plan without resources is hallucination. Despite the Pentagon's 2021 Climate Adaptation Plan and the intelligence community's dire assessments, significant funding and sustained attention are still lacking. The National Guard, for instance, is increasingly stretched by "year-round" fire seasons and disaster relief, potentially compromising its role as a "Strategic Reserve." While intent is high, the transition from fossil fuels to alternative energy and the hardening of infrastructure will cost trillions, requiring a "sea change" in investment.
9. Bureaucracy and Slowness Thwart Urgent Action
The U.S. government still operates at human speed, not machine speed.
Outdated operational tempo. The national security machine, designed for a slower, more predictable era, struggles to respond at the "speed of light" demanded by modern threats. General John Hyten lamented the Pentagon's "unbelievably bureaucratic and slow" processes, where developing new capabilities takes "ten to fifteen years." This inertia means the US is constantly chasing problems rather than anticipating them.
Accountability deficit. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates highlighted the lack of accountability in procurement, where "not one of them can make a final decision." Urgent matters only progress when a top leader "grabs it," bypassing the system. This reliance on individual intervention, rather than systemic efficiency, is a "recipe for disaster" in an age of rapidly evolving dangers.
Mindset over technology. The National Commission on Artificial Intelligence warned that adopting AI requires "profound adjustments in national security business practices, organizational cultures, and mindsets." The government lags in digital workforce, acquisition, and data practices. Overcoming this bureaucratic inertia and fostering a culture of continuous adaptation is crucial to harness talent and technology at the pace required to stay ahead of threats.
10. A Fundamental Overhaul is Needed: From "Decathlon" Machine to "Mutual Assured Awareness"
This country’s national security system needs an overhaul, a retooling that rivals the major changes made at other critical turning points in history: the end of World War II, after the collapse of the Soviet Empire in 1989, and post-9/11.
Redefining national security. The US must expand its definition of national security beyond traditional military threats to encompass germs, digits, drones, and storms. This requires a "decathlon" machine capable of both lethal force and life-saving, with a warning system tuned to fast and slow threats, and an action machine ready to respond across all domains.
From secrets to mysteries. The warning machine must adapt to deal with both "secrets" (hidden but discoverable information) and "mysteries" (unknown and unknowable factors). This involves developing new disciplines like open-source intelligence, fostering critical thinking, and establishing clear standards of evidence to prompt actionable responses from decision-makers.
Institutional innovation. New coordinating mechanisms, akin to the National Counterterrorism Center, are needed for biosecurity, cyber, and climate threats, integrating federal, state, local, and private sector efforts. This requires moving beyond "boom-and-bust" funding cycles, cultivating expertise, and fostering a culture of continuous readiness and adaptation, ensuring the US can lead in an era where "time is no longer on our side."
Last updated:
Similar Books
