As a condition of gaining access to classified information, many government employees agree to submit to official pre-publication review of any public statement they wish to make that is related to their government employment.
This procedure has long been a source of conflict and controversy, but over time the pre-publication review process has become increasingly onerous, internally contradictory, and disruptive.
As part of an ongoing dialog on the subject, I offered some thoughts on “Fixing Pre-Publication Review: What Should Be Done?” on the Just Security blog.
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.
Investment should instead be directed at sectors where American technology and innovation exist but the infrastructure to commercialize them domestically does not—and where the national security case is clear.
AI is already consequential, but its future trajectory remains contested. Policymakers should make their assumptions explicit, focus on what can be shaped rather than what can be perfectly predicted, and build institutions that can learn and respond as evidence changes.