At a recent hearing on Capitol Hill, a sobering warning was delivered to lawmakers: the United States must act swiftly to transform its defense capabilities or risk being unprepared for a potential conflict with China. The hearing, titled “The Imperative to Strengthen America’s Defense Industrial Base and Workforce,” brought together policymakers, military strategists, and leaders from the defense industry to highlight the pressing need for innovation. Central to the discussion was the role of deep technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), autonomy, and software, in countering what witnesses described as increasingly innovative adversaries.
Dr. William Greenwalt, a non-resident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), set the tone by urging the U.S. to adopt a proactive approach. “Planning, preparing, and then doing what is necessary as if we will be at war with China in the next three years is probably the best way to ensure that we will not be at war with China during this time,” he said. His statement underscored the prevailing sense of urgency and the belief that inaction could embolden Beijing.
Adding to this dire outlook, Chris Brose, Chief Strategy Officer at Anduril Industries, warned that America’s current defense industrial base would struggle to sustain a conflict. “The U.S. would run out of weapons in under a week of war with China,” he cautioned, calling for a radical overhaul of traditional production systems. Brose and other witnesses argued that deep-tech innovations are critical for both creating cutting-edge military platforms and scaling production processes to meet modern demands.
The hearing emphasised the inadequacy of traditional defense systems in the face of rapidly evolving threats. Witnesses pointed to China’s technological advancements and military modernisation as a stark reminder of the need for innovation. In particular, AI and autonomous systems were hailed as transformative tools capable of redefining the battlefield.
“Deterrence depends on an industrial base that can produce orders of magnitude more weapons and military platforms,” Brose asserted. “This is not possible on a relevant timeline with our traditional defense systems and their equally traditional means of production, but it is eminently achievable with new classes of autonomous vehicles and weapons.”
Witnesses outlined the dual benefits of these technologies: enabling faster, more precise responses to emerging threats and dramatically improving production efficiency. The concept of “hyper-scaling”—rapidly increasing the production of critical systems—was highlighted as a key advantage of adopting deep-tech solutions. By leveraging AI-driven processes, the defense industrial base could potentially achieve the agility needed to outpace adversaries in a conflict scenario.
Beyond production, AI’s potential applications in surveillance, logistics, and decision-making were also noted. These tools, advocates argued, would be central to maintaining strategic superiority in an era where technological innovation often dictates geopolitical outcomes.
Despite the enthusiasm for deep-tech solutions, the hearing conspicuously sidestepped the ethical dilemmas associated with their deployment. AI-powered weapons and targeting systems have become lightning rods for controversy, particularly in light of their use in conflict zones like Gaza. Reports have linked these systems to civilian casualties and high error rates, raising serious questions about their reliability and accountability.
Critics argue that the rush to adopt AI in defense often neglects critical discussions about oversight. Autonomous systems, by design, operate with minimal human intervention, which can lead to catastrophic consequences if errors occur. For example, a misidentified target or malfunctioning algorithm could escalate conflicts or result in significant collateral damage.
Moreover, the broader implications of AI-driven warfare remain deeply concerning. Can algorithms be trusted to make ethical decisions in the heat of battle? How do militaries ensure that AI systems are not misused or hacked? These questions remain largely unanswered, even as governments and defense contractors push forward with their development.
The urgency to modernise America’s defense capabilities is driven in large part by the evolving geopolitical landscape. China’s rapid military modernisation, coupled with its assertive posture in the Indo-Pacific, has heightened tensions with the U.S. While both nations have expressed a desire to avoid open conflict, the potential for miscalculation remains high, particularly in contested regions like Taiwan or the South China Sea.
Advocates for deep-tech solutions argue that the U.S. must act decisively to deter aggression. By demonstrating the ability to respond swiftly and effectively to threats, they contend, America can discourage adversaries from pursuing risky strategies. This view aligns with the broader doctrine of deterrence, which posits that preparing for war is often the best way to prevent it.
However, critics warn that such an approach risks escalating tensions further. By framing conflict with China as a near-certainty, policymakers may inadvertently contribute to an arms race that destabilises the region. Balancing the need for preparedness with the pursuit of diplomatic solutions will be critical in avoiding unnecessary confrontations.
The Capitol Hill hearing made it clear that America’s defense industrial base must evolve to meet the demands of the 21st century. Deep-tech innovations like AI and autonomy offer powerful tools for maintaining strategic superiority, but their adoption must be approached with caution.
Ethical considerations, transparency, and accountability must be integral to the development and deployment of these technologies. International norms and agreements may also play a role in ensuring that AI-driven systems are used responsibly. Without these safeguards, the risks of misuse or unintended consequences could outweigh the benefits.
Ultimately, the push for deep tech reflects broader questions about the role of technology in modern warfare. As the U.S. seeks to counter emerging threats, it must also grapple with the moral and practical challenges of integrating these tools into its defense strategy. The choices made today will shape not only America’s military capabilities but also the future of global stability.
By investing in innovation while addressing its ethical dimensions, Washington has the opportunity to set a standard for responsible technological advancement—one that prioritises security without sacrificing humanity.
