Center for a New American Security (CNAS)

ICYMI: Tami Overby, James Kim, and Eleanor Hume joined moderator Emily Kilcrease to discuss a new report by Hume and co-author Geoffrey Gertz on how the private sector can drive U.S.-South Korea cooperation and help both countries achieve their economic security goals. Find a full link to the report in the replies, and watch a replay of the event here: https://lnkd.in/ezKW5Vxr

CNAS is currently hiring across multiple levels and departments—join our team for the opportunity to support the creation of bold, innovative and bipartisan foreign policy in one of Washington’s leading national security think tanks.    Open roles include: 💬 Communications Specialist 🎨 Graphic Designer ✍🏻 Editor 🌐 AI Systems Coordinator 📚 Research Assistant/Associate, Transatlantic Security Program Find our available opportunities in the comments.

In a new essay from the CNAS Defense Program’s series, “The New American Defense Industrial Base”, Brian Katz addresses the new barrier threatening to hold back the defense tech sector—the transition from intermittent purchases by the Pentagon to sustained, institutionalized funding. “The question is no longer whether the defense tech sector can deliver the innovative capabilities the warfighter needs. It is whether U.S. institutions can convert that innovation into enduring industrial power before the strategic window closes.” In view of the systemic risks brought on by this “second valley of death", Katz details 5 shifts that can be adopted by Congress and the Department of Defense to ensure a meaningful role for the next generation of defense tech companies. Find the full essay in the comments.

To bomb or not to to bomb? That is the U.S. question on Iran right now: 1. The Stalemate of Hormuz continues, with huge costs for the United States and the global economy. President Trump is holding out for a deal that ends the war on favorable terms. But no such agreement appears in the offing. 2. Parsing U.S. objectives has been hard, but they’ve included ending Iran’s nuclear program, capping its missile inventory, eliminating its drone production, stopping its support for regional proxies, and encouraging Iranians to overthrow their government. 3. Those goals are now reduced to two: opening the Strait of Hormuz and getting a nuclear deal. But even that has remained elusive. Tehran is offering just one: reopening the Strait in exchange for an end to the U.S. blockade, with the nuclear details to be worked out later. 4. The administration rightly worries that later will never come, and once the blockade ends so too will its primary source of leverage over Iran. No nuke deal now could mean no nuke deal ever. 5. In the meantime, Tehran is asking for a victor’s peace, demanding reparations and the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the Middle East. As it makes these unacceptable requests, it is moving to impose indefinite control over the Strait. 6. How then to break the stalemate? Trump could restart the bombing campaign and hope to shake the regime into compliance. That may not, however, solve his problem. If six weeks of intense bombing did not force an Iranian capitulation, will another week do the job? Three? Six? Ten? 7. A narrow deal to reopen the Strait, with some aspirational language on the nuclear file - but no definitive end to the Iranian program - appears most likely. But we may see a return to military force before we get there. 8. The world is not waiting during the interim. Countries are preparing for a new normal, building ports and pipelines to bypass the Strait, seeking deals with Tehran to allow passage and, in the case of Oman, talking with Iran about a joint toll system. This is a poor outcome, to say the least, and worse than before the war. 9. Much remains uncertain. But for now, it is clear that the hardliner-dominated Iranian regime is not going anywhere. The Strait is easy to close and hard to open. The U.S. will have to combine pressure and containment to block its worst ambitions. The war has not ended the Iranian problem but rather created new ones.

Great conversation with Sara Schuman to debrief on the Trump-Xi summit. For a "do nothing" summit with so few concrete outcomes, there is a lot to unpack. We get into the new framing of "strategic stability" and whether that will constrain U.S. competitive actions moving forward. And as Sara points out, deterrence, not conciliation, is more likely to lead to stability on U.S. terms over the long haul. Listen here on the "Derisky Business" podcast from Center for a New American Security (CNAS) ⬇️ 📻 https://lnkd.in/eGhatGjG

Earlier this week, Stacie Pettyjohn joined the Irregular Warfare Initiative podcast to discuss her recent report Hellscape for Taiwan: Rethinking Asymmetric Defense. The report, coauthored with Molly Campbell, develops operational concepts that leverage asymmetric capabilities to defeat a potential invasion of Taiwan. Tune into the episode here or wherever you get your podcasts, and find a link to the report in the comments. https://lnkd.in/eT_RF_S9

ICYMI: House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast joined CNAS for a fireside chat with Daniel Remler on U.S.-China AI competition. Chairman Mast highlighted the imperative for Congress to pass robust legislation limiting chip sales to adversaries, preventing the theft of technology, and maintaining American leadership in AI. “There is a reason that we don’t sell Lockheed F-35s, F-22s to China…” he argued, comparing AI chips to military hardware, “It's because we don't want them militarily, or any other way, to be on par with the United States of America.” The conversation also touched on AI’s offensive cyber capabilities, interoperability with allies, physical AI and robotics, and concerns regarding distillation. Find the link to watch the full event in the comments.

Virtual registration for the 2026 CNAS Annual Conference is now live! In today’s international political landscape, the old national security playbook no longer applies. From emerging technologies to great power rivalries and economic security, contemporary problems are unsuited to yesterday’s answers. America and its allies need to set New Rules to compete, deter, and win in the 21st century. Join CNAS for our 2026 Annual Conference on June 11 to hear from leading voices in national security on today’s most consequential issues—and the New Rules to address them. Register to attend online: https://lnkd.in/eMKCBcqr

Join CNAS for a panel discussion with Tami Overby, J. James Kim, Eleanor Hume, and Emily Kilcrease on how the U.S. and South Korea can build a more durable partnership and make a meaningful contribution to the economic security of both through cooperation in the private sector.