NATO needs a strategy for emerging and disruptive technologies

The incoming Biden administration is expected to reassert ties with Europe, hoping to leverage America’s allies and partners at NATO in the great power competition with China and Russia. As U.S. and European leaders set their collective agenda at the next NATO summit, a top priority should be establishing a NATO framework for emerging and disruptive technologies (EDT).

For the United States, it is important that the alliance adapt together to defend against algorithms and bots, as much as bullets and bombs. Europe shares this mindset but differs from the United States on key defense tech issues, such as regulation, data, and stakes in national champion companies. To avoid the dangerous transatlantic rifts of the last four years, Brussels and Washington must bridge that gap and forge an alliance approach to EDT.

NATO has acknowledged the need to harness the power of such technologies, but current efforts have produced innovation theater, as opposed to fundamental organizational change. NATO lags behind in critical areas such as 5G, hypersonics , artificial intelligence (AI), unmanned systems, and quantum science.

In the past, NATO has used frameworks to get member states to agree on priorities, dedicate resources, and empower authorities to act. Looking to the next NATO summit, transatlantic leaders should champion an EDT framework built around four practical pillars:

Establishing an organic assessment and coordination capacity at the strategic level. To fulfill its potential as the transatlantic coordinating tool on the security dimensions of EDT, the alliance needs an in-house capability to assess challenges driven by rapidly evolving technologies. It must examine the advantages and vulnerabilities of adversaries and competitors, as well as gaps in NATO’s approach and capabilities. NATO must explore how EDT can be applied to tackle below-threshold threats, enhance defense planning, boost exercises, and support decision-making. Building on ongoing efforts, this should occur at the strategic level of the alliance, fusing civil and military perspectives and data to inform the development and introduction of cutting-edge EDT. It must also include a more robust mechanism for aligning capabilities and gaps across members, key partners, and the European Union. As defense budgets contract amidst the Covid-19 crisis, this approach will maximize return on investment and improve NATO’s strategic edge.

Seeding the market by improving engagement with industry. A strategic assessment function will not be valuable unless industry leaders are engaged and incentivized. NATO needs to connect to the private sector early and often, clearly communicating its priorities and requirements while providing accessible opportunities for industry, including non-traditionals, to readily sell into the alliance. Too often national and international defense organizations do not provide discernable paths to revenue for these companies, artificially limiting their industrial bases. The long lead times for these projects are often unattractive or unfeasible, especially for small companies and start-ups where radical innovation takes place. To remedy this, the alliance should look to the U.S. Department of Defense, which has succeeded in attracting startups and non-traditionals to its ecosystem through rapid awards, proof-of-concept contracts, and matching venture capital funds that start-ups receive.

Enhancing standardization and interoperability by creating a system of systems. To meet the challenges of future warfare, the alliance must be able communicate and operate across militaries, capabilities, and domains. This requires more standardized, secure, and resilient platforms, systems, and infrastructure. NATO needs an EDT strategy for integration, not just innovation. Leading candidates for Biden’s Pentagon team have emphasized this priority, supporting a CJADC2 concept – a “network of networks” to ensure reliable command and control. The alliance should leverage CJADC2 as a better framework for standardization and interoperability, paving the way for more complex joint operations. This requires a change in doctrine and a shift away from platforms to create a system of systems. Going forward, NATO needs this same approach to rapidly develop and deploy emerging defense and dual-use technologies for conventional and hybrid conflicts. This involves placing big, transformative bets on critical technologies, such as unmanned air and maritime systems, artificial intelligence (AI), and hypersonics.

Coordinate with the EU. NATO should better leverage its ability to assign capability and spending targets to encourage its members to innovate. For instance, to complement the 2 percent of GDP defense spending benchmark, NATO could mandate that allies invest a certain portion of that into emerging technologies. It should also rework the 2 percent metric to include civilian investment in dual-use technologies that may fall outside of traditional defense budgets. Where NATO lacks the capacity to enforce these standards, the European Union brings the legislative and budgetary authority to promote them. NATO and the EU should coordinate research and development, provide seed funding toward these targets, and reinforce them with legal tools where possible. NATO and the EU should also initiate a strategic dialogue to address fundamental issues of tech governance and data sharing.

The ability to employ emerging and disruptive technologies more effectively than competitors such as China and Russia will shape the global role of the United States and the transatlantic alliance in the coming decades. NATO has begun to talk the talk, but now it must walk the walk.

Lauren Speranza (@LaurenSperanza) is Director of the Transatlantic Defense and Security program at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). Nicholas Nelson is a Fellow with the Transatlantic Defense and Security program at CEPA.

预计即将上任的拜登政府将重申与欧洲的关系，希望在与中国和俄罗斯的大国竞争中，利用美国在北约的盟友和伙伴。随着美欧领导人在下次北约峰会上制定共同议程，建立北约新兴和颠覆性技术（EDT）框架应成为首要任务。

对美国而言，联盟必须像防御子弹和炸弹一样，共同适应应对算法和机器人的威胁。欧洲也持有同样的观点，但在监管、数据以及对国家龙头企业的股权等关键国防技术问题上与美国存在分歧。为了避免重蹈过去四年跨大西洋关系破裂的覆辙，布鲁塞尔和华盛顿必须弥合分歧，并就电子数据技术（EDT）达成联盟共识。

北约已承认需要利用此类技术的力量，但目前的努力更多地流于形式，而非带来根本性的组织变革。北约在5G、高超音速技术、人工智能、无人系统和量子科学等关键领域落后于其他国家。

过去，北约曾利用各种框架促使成员国就优先事项达成一致，拨付资源，并授权相关机构采取行动。展望即将召开的北约峰会，跨大西洋领导人应倡导以四大支柱为基础构建的“紧急应对机制框架”（EDT）：

在战略层面建立有机的评估和协调能力。为了充分发挥其作为跨大西洋在电子战安全层面协调工具的潜力，北约需要具备内部能力来评估快速发展的技术所带来的挑战。它必须审视对手和竞争对手的优势和弱点，以及北约方法和能力方面的差距。北约必须探索如何运用电子战来应对低于阈值的威胁、加强防御规划、促进演习并支持决策。在现有努力的基础上，这项工作应在联盟的战略层面开展，融合民事和军事视角及数据，为尖端电子战的开发和应用提供信息。此外，还必须建立一个更健全的机制，以协调成员国、主要伙伴和欧盟之间的能力和差距。在新冠疫情危机导致国防预算缩减的情况下，这种方法将最大限度地提高投资回报率，并提升北约的战略优势。

通过加强与行业的互动来培育市场。如果行业领袖不参与其中并获得激励，战略评估职能将毫无价值。北约需要尽早并频繁地与私营部门建立联系，清晰地传达其优先事项和需求，同时为包括非传统企业在内的各行业提供便捷的渠道，使其能够轻松地向联盟销售产品和服务。然而，国家和国际防务组织往往未能为这些公司提供明确的盈利途径，人为地限制了它们的产业基础。这些项目漫长的周期通常缺乏吸引力或不可行，尤其对于那些进行颠覆性创新的小型公司和初创企业而言更是如此。为了解决这个问题，北约应该借鉴美国国防部的经验。美国国防部通过快速授标、概念验证合同以及为初创企业提供配套的风险投资基金，成功地吸引了众多初创企业和非传统企业加入其生态系统。

通过构建系统之系统来增强标准化和互操作性。为了应对未来战争的挑战，北约必须能够在不同军事力量、能力和领域之间进行沟通和行动。这需要更加标准化、安全和具有韧性的平台、系统和基础设施。北约需要的不仅仅是创新，更需要一项旨在整合的新兴国防技术（EDT）战略。拜登五角大楼团队的主要候选人强调了这一优先事项，并支持“联合联合防务与控制”（CJADC2）概念——一个“网络之网络”，以确保可靠的指挥与控制。北约应利用CJADC2作为更佳的标准化和互操作性框架，为更复杂的联合行动铺平道路。这需要改变作战理论，并摒弃以平台为中心的模式，转而构建系统之系统。展望未来，北约需要采用同样的方法来快速开发和部署用于常规和混合冲突的新兴国防和两用技术。这需要在关键技术领域进行大规模的变革性投资，例如无人机和无人机系统、人工智能（AI）和高超音速技术。

与欧盟协调。北约应更好地利用其设定能力和支出目标的能力，鼓励成员国进行创新。例如，为了补充GDP 2%的国防开支基准，北约可以强制盟国将其中一定比例的资金投资于新兴技术。北约还应重新调整2%的指标，将可能不在传统国防预算范围内的两用技术的民用投资纳入其中。在北约缺乏执行这些标准的能力时，欧盟可以提供立法和预算授权来推动这些标准的实施。北约和欧盟应协调研发工作，为这些目标提供启动资金，并在可能的情况下利用法律工具强化这些目标。北约和欧盟还应启动战略对话，以解决技术治理和数据共享方面的根本问题。

未来几十年，美国及其跨大西洋联盟能否比中国和俄罗斯等竞争对手更有效地运用新兴颠覆性技术，将决定其在全球的角色。北约已经开始谈论这些技术，但现在必须付诸行动。

劳伦·斯佩兰扎（@LaurenSperanza）是欧洲政策分析中心（CEPA）跨大西洋防务与安全项目的主任。尼古拉斯·纳尔逊是CEPA跨大西洋防务与安全项目的研究员。