Latest news with #NationalSecurityCommission
Forbes
24-07-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Trump AI Plan Omits Role Of Immigration And Foreign-Born Talent
Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order in the Oval Office on January 23, 2025. The Trump ... More administration's AI plan omits the role of U.S. immigration policy in providing American companies access to talent in cutting-edge fields. (Photo by) The Trump administration's AI plan omits the role of U.S. immigration policy in providing American companies access to talent in cutting-edge fields. The plan does not mention immigrants or international students, even though they compose a significant portion of America's researchers and entrepreneurs in artificial intelligence. The ability of U.S. universities to educate students and conduct research on AI is also not discussed. The administration's plan disregards the recommendations of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, which, in 2021, called for liberalizing U.S. immigration policy because of the central role of human capital in AI. The new AI plan does not mention efforts to encourage more U.S. students to study in AI-related fields, instead singling out jobs for electricians and 'advanced HVAC technicians.' The authors of the plan avoided any statements that would conflict with the Trump administration's policies aimed at restricting immigrants and international students. The Lack Of Immigration Or Education Recommendations In The AI Action Plan On July 23, 2025, the White House released the Trump administration's AI Action Plan, which was called for in Executive Order 14179. The plan contains policy recommendations that businesses support, including a light touch on federal AI regulations, discouraging states from enacting intrusive AI regulations and a pledge to streamline permitting for building data centers and power generation. It also contains recommendations on exporting AI to allies and partners, promoting open-source AI and building scientific datasets. The AI plan contains a glaring omission: The role of talented U.S.-born and foreign-born individuals in researching, developing and innovating in AI fields. The 23-page report gives the impression that artificial intelligence develops spontaneously and requires mostly data centers, power generation and occasional maintenance. The plan includes no mention of higher education, U.S. students, international students or the immigration of talented individuals to work in AI. The only occupations the plan singles out are jobs in infrastructure that do not require a college degree. 'To build the infrastructure needed to power America's AI future, we must also invest in the workforce that will build, operate, and maintain it—including roles such as electricians, advanced HVAC technicians, and a host of other high-paying occupations,' according to the plan. While important, it seems unlikely that America's place in the world on artificial intelligence rests on producing enough Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning technicians, nor is the training of such individuals usually considered a federal responsibility. The Trump administration's policies toward universities, international students and immigrants posed a dilemma for the authors of the AI plan. How could they recommend policies that, while sensible from an AI perspective, would be the opposite of the administration's other policies? The Trump administration has threatened the existence of Harvard, one of America's top research universities and removed research funding from several other higher education institutions. Trump officials attempted to deport thousands of international students for minor offenses, banned the entry of students to attend Harvard and stated an intention to end Optional Practical Training and STEM OPT, which economists say would be a significant blow to attracting world-class talent. An upcoming H-1B rule is expected to disadvantage international students who hope to gain H-1B petitions and build a career in the United States. Additional backstory helps explain the plan's omissions. In December 2024, Laura Loomer attacked Sriram Krishnan, now a senior policy adviser for AI at the White House, for past favorable comments about high-skilled immigration. Elon Musk defended Krishnan and stated his strong support for H-1B visas. After days of controversy, Donald Trump came down on Musk's side, despite his administration's restrictive first-term policies toward H-1B visas. Although Musk provided significant financial support to Trump's presidential election campaign, the two men have fallen out, and it's unclear whether past positive statements by Trump and Musk on H-1B visas mean anything today. In October 2023, the Biden administration issued an executive order on artificial intelligence. The non-immigration parts of the AI executive order were criticized as potentially leading to excessive regulation. However, businesses appreciated the immigration measures, which directed the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to enact policies 'to attract and retain talent in AI and other critical and emerging technologies in the United States economy.' Favorable immigration policies resulted from the Biden executive order. Earlier guidance, issued in January 2022, proved of practical assistance in attracting and retaining high-skilled talent. Approvals for O-1A visas for individuals of 'extraordinary ability' and national interest waivers for employment-based green cards rose significantly after the guidance. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang delivers a keynote address during the Nvidia GTC Artificial Intelligence ... More Conference at SAP Center on March 18, 2024 in San Jose, California. (Photo by) The Immigration Recommendations Of The National Security Commission On Artificial Intelligence Research shows that immigrants and international students are vital to America's present and future development of AI. 'Immigrants have founded or cofounded nearly two-thirds (65% or 28 of 43) of the top AI companies in the United States, and 70% of full-time graduate students in fields related to artificial intelligence are international students,' according to a National Foundation for American Policy study, which I authored. 'Seventy-seven percent of the leading U.S.-based AI companies were founded or cofounded by immigrants or the children of immigrants. Forty-two percent (18 of 43) of the top U.S.-based AI companies had a founder who came to America as an international student.' A report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers published at the end of the Biden administration states, 'Between 40% and 60% of AI-related master's degrees have been awarded to non-U.S. citizens in the last 5 years. For Ph.D.'s, this share has been above 50% since 2003, most recently 59% in 2022.' (The figure may be higher if one defines 'AI-related' more broadly.) The economists who authored the study concluded that reforms 'could help increase the supply of top talent in the United States.' 'Immigration obstacles often prevent capable workers—including many graduates of U.S. institutions—from moving to or staying in the United States and supplying their talents in the U.S. workforce,' according to the economists' report. 'Among non-U.S. citizen AI Ph.D.'s who left the United States, over half cited immigration issues as relevant to their decision to leave.' The report notes 60% of foreign Ph.D. recipients in the U.S. say they have trouble staying compared to 12% of Ph.D. holders in other countries. The bipartisan National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence released a final report to Congress in 2021. The commission recommended liberalizing U.S. immigration laws to allow the United States to attract and retain AI talent. In a section titled 'Strengthen AI talent through immigration,' the report concluded: 'Nations that can successfully attract and retain highly skilled individuals gain strategic and economic advantages over competitors. Human capital advantages are particularly significant in the field of AI, where demand for talent far exceeds supply. Highly skilled immigrants accelerate American innovation, improve entrepreneurship and create jobs.' While the Trump administration has tried to block more Chinese students from the United States, the AI commission recommended the opposite approach. "We looked at the question of how important are Chinese researchers for the AI effort, in our report, and it turns out the Chinese researchers are the number one authors on the key papers,' said former Google CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt at a Congressional hearing. 'If you were to get rid of all of them . . . you will, in fact, hurt America's AI leadership.' Schmidt co-chaired the AI commission. The Trump AI plan discusses the importance of AI, biotechnology, defense and cybersecurity. The Department of Defense, in its Fiscal Year 2020 Industrial Capabilities Report, cited NFAP research and highlighted the need for a significantly larger number of individuals to work in software and other STEM fields in America. A recent Congressional advisory commission concluded that changing U.S. immigration laws would allow America to increase the number of biotechnology researchers. The biotech commission praised international students but warned about the shortcomings of America's immigration policies. 'These highly educated and credentialed biotechnologists have access to American research and intellectual property, they often generate pathbreaking inventions and they often go on to establish valuable startups,' according to the final report. 'But many do so outside of the United States, largely because U.S. immigration policy forces them to leave. This failure puts the United States at a strategic disadvantage.' Eighty-three percent of individuals with Ph.D.'s in computer and information sciences in the U.S. who perform research and development as a major work activity are foreign-born, according to an NFAP analysis. The foreign-born share is 80% in electrical and computer engineering. Research, reports and commissions conclude that foreign-born talent is crucial to America's AI present and future. The just-released AI Action Plan indicates that recommendations coming from the executive branch are unlikely to conflict with the Trump administration's immigration policies.
Gulf Insider
23-06-2025
- Business
- Gulf Insider
Iranian Parliament Backs Strait Of Hormuz Closure
Iranian state-owned outlet Press TV has released a new report quoting Major General Kowsari, a senior member of the Iranian Parliament's National Security Commission, who stated: ' The Parliament has reached the conclusion that the Strait of Hormuz should be closed, but the final decision in this regard lies with the Supreme National Security Council .' ‼️ Major General Kowsari, member of the National Security Commission of the Parliament: The Parliament has reached the conclusion that the Strait of Hormuz should be closed, but the final decision in this regard lies with the Supreme National Security Council. — Press TV Breaking (@PTVBreaking1) June 22, 2025 If Ayatollah Ali Khamenei approves the proposed closure of the critical maritime chokepoint—through which approximately 30% of global seaborne oil and 20% of LNG transit—Brent crude and natural gas futures will surge sharply this evening. Reuters earlier cited lawmaker and Revolutionary Guards Commander Esmail Kosari, who told Young Journalist Club that closing the critical maritime checkpoint is on the agenda and 'will be done whenever necessary.' 'We can close the strait of Hormuz and shut their mouths. This will ruin their economy'Young Iranians dismiss Trump attacks, sharing thoughts on bombings to Fars News'We should hit Dimona 10 times harder' — RT (@RT_com) June 22, 2025 Crypto-based prediction market Polymarket shows that odds for a 'Strait of Hormuz closure by July' surged from roughly 15% before the U.S. B-2 stealth bomber strikes on Iran's key nuclear sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan—to as high as 60% earlier today, reflecting a sharp repricing of geopolitical risk. The potential closure of the strait was recently outlined in a 'worst-case scenario' by JPMorgan's chief commodity strategist, Natasha Kaneva (available to pro subscribers in the usual place). The note cautioned that a severe outcome could send oil prices into the $120-$130 per barrel range. London-based oil strategist at Bloomberg, Julian Lee, penned several important questions about what would happen if Iran tried to close the critical maritime chokepoint: Could Iran really block the Strait of Hormuz? Iran would have no legal authority to order a halt to traffic through Hormuz, so would need to achieve this by force or the threat of force. If its navy tried to bar entry to the strait, it would likely be met with a strong response from the U.S. Fifth Fleet and other Western navies patrolling the area. But it could cause severe disruption without a single Iranian warship leaving port. One option would be to harry shipping with small, fast patrol boats. Or it could launch drones and fire missiles toward ships from coastal or inland sites. That could make it too risky for commercial ships to venture through. Similar tactics have been employed successfully by the Houthi militia in Yemen to disrupt traffic through the Bab el-Mandeb strait leading into the Red Sea on the other side of the Arabian peninsula. The Houthis have mostly fired missiles and drones at ships after warning owners of vessels linked to the U.S., the UK and Israel that they will be attacked if they approach the area. A US-led force in the Red Sea is seeking to protect shipping there. But the number of ships sailing through the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden was still down about 70% in June compared with the average level of 2022 and 2023, according to Clarkson Research Services Ltd, a unit of the world's largest shipbroker. This has forced vessel operators to reroute their traffic around the southern tip of Africa instead of going through the Suez Canal — a lengthier and more expensive journey for ships traveling between Asia and Europe. Closing the Strait of Hormuz would quickly hit Iran's own economy as it would prevent it from exporting its petroleum. And it would antagonize China, the biggest buyer of Iranian oil and a critical partner that's used its veto power at the UN Security Council to shield Iran from Western-led sanctions or resolutions. When has Iran disrupted shipping? Iran has used harassment of ships in the Gulf for decades to register its dissatisfaction with sanctions against it, or as leverage in disputes. In April 2024, hours before launching a drone and missile attack on Israel, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps seized an Israel-linked container ship near the Strait of Hormuz. Iran released the ship's crew the following month, according to trade publication Lloyd's List. Tehran claimed that the MSC Aries had violated maritime regulations, but analysts pointed to its Israeli ownership connection as a motive. When it seized a US-bound tanker in April 2023, Iran said the ship had struck another vessel. But the move appeared to be retaliation for the seizure off Malaysia's coast of a ship loaded with Iranian crude by U.S. authorities on the grounds of sanctions violations. In May 2022, Iran seized two Greek tankers and held them for six months, presumably a response to the confiscation by Greek and U.S. authorities of Iranian oil on a different ship. The cargo was eventually released and the Greek tankers freed. So, too, was the oil on a tanker that Iran said it impounded in January 'in retaliation for the theft of oil by the US.' Has Iran ever closed the Strait of Hormuz? Not so far. During the 1980-88 war between Iraq and Iran, Iraqi forces attacked an oil export terminal at Kharg Island, northwest of the strait, in part to provoke an Iranian retaliation that would draw the U.S. into the conflict. Afterward, in what was called the Tanker War, the two sides attacked 451 vessels between them. That significantly raised the cost of insuring tankers and helped push up oil prices. When sanctions were imposed on Iran in 2011, it threatened to close the strait, but ultimately backed off. Commodore Alireza Tangsiri, head of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps naval forces, said shortly before the MSC Aries seizure that Iran has the option of disrupting traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, but chooses not to. How did the U.S. and allies respond to threats to Hormuz shipping in the past? During the Tanker War, the U.S. Navy resorted to escorting vessels through the Gulf. In 2019, it dispatched an aircraft carrier and B-52 bombers to the region. The same year, the U.S. started Operation Sentinel in response to Iran's disruption of shipping. Ten other nations — including the UK, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain — later joined the operation, known now as the International Maritime Security Construct. Since late 2023, much of the focus on protecting shipping has switched away from the Strait of Hormuz and onto the southern Red Sea, the region's other vital waterway, and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait that connects it to the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. Attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis on shipping entering or exiting the Red Sea became a greater concern than the Strait of Hormuz. UK-flagged tanker Kohzan Maru reversed course in the Strait of Hormuz overnight after the strikes became public. At least one tanker in the Strait of Hormuz appears to have paused its transit after the US struck Iran overnight. Seen here, the UK-flagged tanker Kohzan Maru reversed course after the strikes became public and is now racing south at top speed. — OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) June 22, 2025 Latest ship tracking data via Bloomberg shows tankers are still flowing through the maritime chokepoint. Other critical maritime chokepoints to keep an eye on in the region. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued this warning to Iran on Fox News: 'If Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, it will be another terrible mistake. It's economic suicide for them if they do it and we retain options to deal with that.' Rubio:'If Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, it will be another terrible mistake. It's economic suicide for them if they do it and we retain options to deal with that' — Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) June 22, 2025 Now the West waits for Iran's retaliatory attack. Also read: Here's How US Strikes On Iran Unfolded
Russia Today
19-05-2025
- Business
- Russia Today
China is sending an important signal to the entire world
Last week, China released its first-ever white paper on national security. While the document brings no major breakthroughs, its publication is significant. It signals two key developments: Chinese leaders are increasingly concerned about the intensifying geopolitical confrontation, and they are ready to play a more assertive role in global affairs – challenging US dominance in the process. The economy-first reform pattern that characterized the leadership of Deng Xiaoping and his successors effectively ended with Xi Jinping's rise to power. The Chinese often refer to the current phase as a 'new era', marked by profound changes both domestically and globally. Under Xi, the central government reversed centrifugal trends and reasserted the foundational principles of the socialist system, restoring the ruling party's authority. Xi has not abandoned the focus on economic development but has paired it with a heightened emphasis on security. In 2014, he introduced a holistic approach to national security, established the National Security Commission, centralized power among top party leaders, and expanded the scope of what falls under national security. This shift triggered wide-ranging legislative reforms and culminated in China adopting its first National Security Strategy in 2021. The newly released white paper is another step along this path. Western commentators often depict Xi Jinping as an authoritarian figure preoccupied with maintaining social control. These portrayals are overstated and misleading, but it is undeniable that the scope of China's national security has never been broader. The May document openly reflects this reality. Beijing sees its expanded security agenda as a response to mounting external threats, a destabilizing international order, and escalating geopolitical tensions amid a global shift toward multipolarity. Political security – defined primarily as safeguarding the party's ruling status – remains the top priority. No compromises should be expected in this domain. China's definition of national security now spans diverse areas: Economy, culture, science and technology, food and health, overseas interests, deep sea, outer space, and many others. This sweeping approach might complicate economic reform, as an overly securitized environment can stifle innovation, reduce openness, and prompt de-risking policies – already visible during the global pandemic. Yet Beijing appears aware of these risks and reiterates its commitment to deepening reform and opening up. Regardless, the fusion of development and security has become the 'new normal' and is poised to be a guiding principle in the upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan. China's approach also integrates domestic and international security. Its new international security doctrine has evolved over several years and took concrete form with the launch of the Global Security Initiative (GSI) in 2022. The initiative is a cornerstone of China's recent diplomatic push, underscoring the abandonment of its previous defensive strategy. The long-standing doctrine of 'hide your strength, bide your time' is no longer in play. After decades of peaceful development, Beijing now positions itself as a frontrunner rather than a latecomer. Whether it can fully leverage this momentum remains to be seen. Still, the launch of the Global Security Initiative and similar initiatives show that China aims to influence global governance. Notably, Xi introduced the Global Security Initiative just weeks after Russia began its special military operation in Ukraine – timing that is unlikely to be coincidental. It suggests that China seeks to present itself as a constructive, peace-oriented, responsible, and stable global power – opposed to US hegemony but careful to avoid direct military confrontation, unlike Russia. China's messaging emphasizes its commitment to universal and common security on the one hand, and adherence to international law on the other. In a 2022 speech at the Boao Forum for Asia, Xi described the world as an 'indivisible security community.' When China released a policy paper on the Global Security Initiative a year later, the term 'indivisible security' reappeared – a noteworthy choice, as it draws from the Helsinki Accords and has long featured in Russian political discourse. Moreover, China has acknowledged the legitimacy of security concerns – concerns that were ignored by the West and contributed to the Ukraine conflict. Although the recent white paper uses the terms 'universal' and 'common' rather than 'indivisible' security, it does not make any difference. Fundamentally, China's approach to international security and global governance diverges from that of the West. Beijing opposes hegemonism, spheres of influence, bloc politics, the export of liberal democracy, and the orchestration of color revolutions. It also criticizes the weaponization of economic tools, unilateral sanctions, extraterritorial jurisdiction, double standards, and other prominent characteristics of the declining 'liberal empire'. At the heart of China's national security lies a strong aversion to military alliances. From Beijing's perspective, these alliances are inherently exclusionary and incompatible with common security. This view underpins China's sympathy for Russia's opposition to NATO and its understanding of the deeper causes behind the Ukraine conflict. China's commitment to non-alignment has deep historical roots. Under Mao, China helped shape the principles of peaceful coexistence, which became a cornerstone of the Non-Aligned Movement. Following the Sino-Soviet split in the early 1960s, formal alliance commitments lost their relevance for Beijing. Since then, China has consistently favored flexible partnerships over binding alliances – with one notable exception: North Korea. Yet this is the exception that proves the rule. In advancing its interests, China may find common ground with other countries of the Global South, as most of them prioritize sovereignty, non-alignment, independent foreign policy, and political stability as a prerequisite for economic development and modernization. At the same time, China can count on Russia – its largest neighbor and key partner. Beijing sees Moscow as essential to maintaining global strategic stability and promoting shared security goals. The recent meeting in May between Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, held to mark the 80th anniversary of victory in the Great Patriotic War, and Xi's presence at the Red Square parade, highlight the central role of the Sino-Russian relationship in shaping a multipolar world. The newly published white paper emphasizes this partnership's significance for global security governance, placing it above China's relations with all other global and regional actors except the United Nations. This is not merely symbolic – it reflects Beijing's genuine strategic priorities.
Axios
08-04-2025
- Business
- Axios
China is beating U.S. in biotech advances, report warns
China has pulled ahead of the United States in key areas of the life sciences, and the U.S. may only have a handful of years to regain dominance in the sector, according to an independent commission's report sent Tuesday to Congress and the White House. Why it matters: Advanced biotechnology is critical to national security, public health and the ability to continue feeding the population. The U.S. slipping as the world's biotechnology leader "would signal a global power shift toward China," says the report from the congressionally appointed National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology. State of play: China has made biotechnology a national priority over the past two decades, and U.S. biotech companies are struggling to attract investors in the current market. China's ability to use artificial intelligence to notch new biotech wins is accelerating and contributing to its rise in the space — and making it increasingly harder for the U.S. to keep up. Beijing's ascendency in the sector could allow it to weaponize biotechnology against the U.S., the report warns. Securing America's position as the global leader of biotechnology will require a whole-government strategy, along with incentives for the private sector and investment in the talent pipeline, per the report. "There is time to act, but no time to wait," the report says. Zoom in: The report makes dozens of recommendations for how the U.S. can remain dominant, including establishing an investment fund to back tech startups that strengthen national and economic security. Congress should also create a National Biotechnology Coordination Office in the White House to coordinate regulation and competition initiatives and prohibit companies working with U.S. national security and health agencies from using certain Chinese suppliers. Catch up quick: The report is the result of two years of deliberation and research conducted between April 2023 and February 2025 by the bipartisan commission, which includes four members of Congress and seven academics, industry leaders and former defense and intelligence officials. What to watch: Whether any legislation arising from the recommendations gains traction in Congress. Congress couldn't agree last year on whether to ban federal contracts with certain Chinese biotech research and equipment firms deemed national security threats. The theme of biotechnology as a national security asset is also manifesting itself elsewhere: It's expected to drive anticipated tariffs on pharmaceuticals. The bottom line: The federal government needs to put significant resources into biotechnology over the next five years, commission member Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.) is expected to say today in a House of Representatives hearing about the report.
