AI Raises the Stakes for National Security: A Strategic Approach
Regulating advanced AI isn’t a simple task; it resembles a game of chess rather than checkers. Every decision matters, and there is a pressing need to anticipate future challenges. A reactive approach could jeopardize long-term objectives.
The Current Landscape
The United States is at a pivotal moment concerning AI regulation, with significant policy decisions being made at both the state and federal levels. Recently, landmark AI safety legislation has been enacted in states such as New York and California. California’s SB 53 took effect on January 1, while New York’s RAISE Act is set to take effect in 2027.
These legislative moves are crucial as they aim for a more cohesive approach to AI regulation, moving away from a fragmented state-by-state system that is unsustainable in the long run.
Harmonization: A Dual Approach
The concept of harmonization is emerging as a solution. The federal government is expected to establish a clear national standard for the most powerful AI systems, focusing on national security issues. Meanwhile, states will address consumer protection, civil rights, and the application of AI in everyday settings like schools and workplaces.
This dual approach allows each government level to leverage its strengths, functioning as one comprehensive rulebook with two distinct roles. The aim is to ensure the United States retains its competitive edge in AI, a technology that is critical for both national security and global economic leadership.
The Urgency of Action
As noted by global leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, the nation that leads in AI will dominate the world. The United States cannot afford to delay or allow fragmentation in its AI strategy at this crucial juncture.
AI leadership is increasingly intertwined with national security, emphasizing the need for a prevention-oriented approach rather than a punitive one. When states act independently, they often resort to a liability-only framework—reacting to issues after they arise.
Centralized Testing for Safety
The federal government’s initiative—the Center for AI Standards and Innovation, established under the Biden administration and updated by the Trump administration—allows for the testing of advanced AI systems prior to widespread deployment. Such centralized testing is crucial for managing risks that individual states or companies cannot tackle alone.
Without harmonization, AI companies would face a maze of conflicting state regulations that may stifle innovation without enhancing public safety. Harmonization offers clarity and consistency for companies while providing stronger protections for the public.
A Balanced Regulatory Framework
The recent legislative actions in New York and California illustrate how states can lead while aligning with federal efforts. By moving towards a unified standard, these two states are setting a benchmark that complements federal initiatives.
This balanced regulatory framework is akin to how vehicle safety standards are set. The federal government establishes national safety standards, requires rigorous testing, and mandates safety features before cars can be sold. This approach prioritizes prevention over reaction, ensuring higher safety standards.
A Historical Perspective
This paradigm of governance is not new. The United States has successfully navigated similar challenges in various sectors, such as aviation, food safety, and telecommunications. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 serves as a historical example where clear national standards facilitated innovation and economic growth.
When the U.S. adopts intelligent, national standards for emerging technologies, it not only avoids falling behind but also leads on a global scale.
Conclusion: The Chessboard Is Set
The stakes are high, and the path forward is clear. By prioritizing prevention, harmonizing state and federal regulations, and maintaining a focus on national security, the United States can reclaim its leadership in the AI era. This is how to win the long game: by playing chess, not checkers.
