Posted on Dec 4, 2024
America's Next Moonshot: Building a Talent Innovation Base for National Security
31K
28
15
13
13
0
At a time when headlines are focused on tech competition with China, America has the opportunity to unleash its greatest strategic advantage – its innovative talent.
The next presidential administration has a historic opportunity to revolutionize how we attract, develop, and deploy America's best minds in service of our nation. The foundation is already in place:
Innovative entities in our government, such as the Defense Innovation Unit, have the authority and standing to integrate more of our nation into solving our most critical defense problems. And our private sector continues to attract the world's most creative minds.
Now it's time to connect these strengths through bold action.
First, establish an Office of National Talent Strategy within the Executive Office of the President. This is not just another bureaucratic initiative – it would be America's talent accelerator – designed to slash hiring times from over 90 days to 9 days, streamline security clearances, and create pathways between the private sector and government service. Imagine a system in which our brightest minds can seamlessly transition between innovative startups to solving our nation’s most pressing national security challenges.
Second, launch a National Security Innovation Corps – call it a modern-day Manhattan Project for talent. The Innovation Corps would offer competitive salaries, rapid advancement opportunities, and the chance to work on projects that genuinely impact national security. Think of it as a Y Combinator for national defense – but with the full backing of the federal government.
The costs for these initiatives are modest compared to the returns. Such an investment would be less than what we spend on a single military aircraft but could transform the very nature of warfare itself through innovative solutions.
China's civ-mil fusion approach and intellectual property theft reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how innovation truly works. Real breakthroughs come not from forced collaboration or stolen ideas but developing talent and innovative platforms and then fully enabling the pursuit of ambitious goals with the resources and freedom they need to succeed. This is where America excels, and it is why a comprehensive talent strategy is needed in this competition with China.
The next administration can implement this vision within its first year in office:
• Month 1-3: Establish the Office of National Talent Strategy.
• Month 4-6: Launch programs for rapid hiring and talent exchanges.
• Month 6-12: Roll out the new pay scales for tech talent.
This is not just about filling government positions; it is about creating a new model for national service in the digital age. Imagine a future where the best computer scientists see national security as their most exciting career option, where entrepreneurs view government service as a natural part of their journey, and where technical experts can freely move between sectors while working on our nation's most critical challenges.
The technology race with China is not just about semiconductors and artificial intelligence; it is about creating an environment where talent and innovation naturally flourish. With the right policies and investments, we can ensure that the next generation of breakthroughs happen right here in the United States – driven by American innovation and powered by American talent.
This is America's next great moonshot.
Dr. Alex Gallo is a US Army Veteran and author of “Vetspective,” a RallyPoint series that
discusses national security, foreign policy, politics, and society and highlights the analysis of
thought-leaders, policy analysts, and scholars. Alex is a Senior Vice President with NobleReach
Foundation. He also serves as a fellow with George Mason University’s National Security
Institute and an adjunct professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University.
Follow him on Twitter at @AlexGalloUSA.
The next presidential administration has a historic opportunity to revolutionize how we attract, develop, and deploy America's best minds in service of our nation. The foundation is already in place:
Innovative entities in our government, such as the Defense Innovation Unit, have the authority and standing to integrate more of our nation into solving our most critical defense problems. And our private sector continues to attract the world's most creative minds.
Now it's time to connect these strengths through bold action.
First, establish an Office of National Talent Strategy within the Executive Office of the President. This is not just another bureaucratic initiative – it would be America's talent accelerator – designed to slash hiring times from over 90 days to 9 days, streamline security clearances, and create pathways between the private sector and government service. Imagine a system in which our brightest minds can seamlessly transition between innovative startups to solving our nation’s most pressing national security challenges.
Second, launch a National Security Innovation Corps – call it a modern-day Manhattan Project for talent. The Innovation Corps would offer competitive salaries, rapid advancement opportunities, and the chance to work on projects that genuinely impact national security. Think of it as a Y Combinator for national defense – but with the full backing of the federal government.
The costs for these initiatives are modest compared to the returns. Such an investment would be less than what we spend on a single military aircraft but could transform the very nature of warfare itself through innovative solutions.
China's civ-mil fusion approach and intellectual property theft reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how innovation truly works. Real breakthroughs come not from forced collaboration or stolen ideas but developing talent and innovative platforms and then fully enabling the pursuit of ambitious goals with the resources and freedom they need to succeed. This is where America excels, and it is why a comprehensive talent strategy is needed in this competition with China.
The next administration can implement this vision within its first year in office:
• Month 1-3: Establish the Office of National Talent Strategy.
• Month 4-6: Launch programs for rapid hiring and talent exchanges.
• Month 6-12: Roll out the new pay scales for tech talent.
This is not just about filling government positions; it is about creating a new model for national service in the digital age. Imagine a future where the best computer scientists see national security as their most exciting career option, where entrepreneurs view government service as a natural part of their journey, and where technical experts can freely move between sectors while working on our nation's most critical challenges.
The technology race with China is not just about semiconductors and artificial intelligence; it is about creating an environment where talent and innovation naturally flourish. With the right policies and investments, we can ensure that the next generation of breakthroughs happen right here in the United States – driven by American innovation and powered by American talent.
This is America's next great moonshot.
Dr. Alex Gallo is a US Army Veteran and author of “Vetspective,” a RallyPoint series that
discusses national security, foreign policy, politics, and society and highlights the analysis of
thought-leaders, policy analysts, and scholars. Alex is a Senior Vice President with NobleReach
Foundation. He also serves as a fellow with George Mason University’s National Security
Institute and an adjunct professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University.
Follow him on Twitter at @AlexGalloUSA.
Innovation
Technology
China
International Relations
Edited 7 d ago
Posted 7 d ago
Responses: 8
3
3
0
3
3
0
We need visionaries to prepare doctrine and technology to win future wars.
Why was Germany so well prepared for WWII?
Germany conducted government and military wide After Action Reviews (AAR) several years before the onset of WWII to counter the military problem of the highest magnitude: Going on the offense and maneuvering toward the enemy with efficacy. This military problem manifested itself in the US Civil War as well.
Blitzkrieg, "Lightening War", was born from the AAR process which entailed the use of Air and Mechanized Ground Forces simultaneously. The objective was to attack with enough violence and speed to overwhelm the enemy without the complete destruction of the opposing forces. Germany's doctrine and technology were years ahead of the Allied Forces.
It is paramount for visionaries to create doctrine and technologies during the inter-war periods to prepare and win future wars. Sometimes nations get this right, sometimes they get it wrong.
The basic format of the AAR is:
- What was planned.
- What happened.
- How to shrink the delta.
Why was Germany so well prepared for WWII?
Germany conducted government and military wide After Action Reviews (AAR) several years before the onset of WWII to counter the military problem of the highest magnitude: Going on the offense and maneuvering toward the enemy with efficacy. This military problem manifested itself in the US Civil War as well.
Blitzkrieg, "Lightening War", was born from the AAR process which entailed the use of Air and Mechanized Ground Forces simultaneously. The objective was to attack with enough violence and speed to overwhelm the enemy without the complete destruction of the opposing forces. Germany's doctrine and technology were years ahead of the Allied Forces.
It is paramount for visionaries to create doctrine and technologies during the inter-war periods to prepare and win future wars. Sometimes nations get this right, sometimes they get it wrong.
The basic format of the AAR is:
- What was planned.
- What happened.
- How to shrink the delta.
(3)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
Prepared as training for a style of mobile warfare when a large part of the supply chain was still horse drawn? They won at first because no one was prepared and Allied Generals were still fighting the last war.
The technology that won the War in Europe for the Allies, especially the Russians, was the Studebaker 2 1/2 Truck.
The technology that won the War in Europe for the Allies, especially the Russians, was the Studebaker 2 1/2 Truck.
(1)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
CPT Lawrence Cable - They won at the start of the war because they had a new military doctrine of combining land and air military weapons systems for "lightening attacks" to overwhelm the enemy quickly.
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
MAJ Ken Landgren - And they didn't take Dunkirk and a trapped British and French Army because they out ran their supply chain. Poland's Army was basically WWI stuff, Stalin had decimated his Officer Corp, the French bet and lost on the Maginot Line and the British were just playing catch-up. But the German Army suffered logistical problems throughout the war because of lack of motorized transportation that never allowed them to exploit some fairly innovative pieces of equipment. Just as a couple of examples, they built less than 1400 Tiger tanks, we built 50,000 Sherman's. During the War the US produced some 560,000 2 1/2 ton 6x6 trucks, plus another 200,000 Studebaker versions for lend-lease, the Russians on the receiving end for the majority.
As Bradley was reported to stating, "Amateurs study Tactics, Professionals study Logistics.
As Bradley was reported to stating, "Amateurs study Tactics, Professionals study Logistics.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Ken Landgren
The facts are there. The Germans used Blitzkrieg very successfully early by the combined arms of Air and Ground. The doctrine and technology were there to execute blitzkrieg, which they did.
I have some knowledge of the logistics issues the Germans. Sometimes tanks had to be shipped back to the rear to be repaired because of the capability was lacking in theater. Eventually the Germans found it difficult then impossible to support large forces in distant theaters.
I have some knowledge of the logistics issues the Germans. Sometimes tanks had to be shipped back to the rear to be repaired because of the capability was lacking in theater. Eventually the Germans found it difficult then impossible to support large forces in distant theaters.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google