Sullivan's AI Foreign Policy Disrupted by Trump

In 2022, Jake Sullivan, serving as the national security adviser under President Joe Biden, initiated a comprehensive interagency planning exercise from the Situation Room. The primary objective was to analyze the potential circumstances and outcomes of an artificial intelligence arms race between the United States and China.

The planning exercise was designed to address a wide spectrum of scenarios. These ranged from escalating trade wars to the possibility of real military conflicts. Additionally, the strategists considered the profound implications of the arrival of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The initiative sought to determine how the federal government should respond to these evolving technological threats and opportunities.

However, the continuity of these strategic plans was reportedly impacted by the subsequent Trump administration. The original reporting suggests that the foreign policy framework established by Sullivan was significantly altered or dismantled following the transition of power. This shift highlights the volatility of national security strategies regarding emerging technologies across different presidential administrations.

In 2022, Jake Sullivan held a powerful position within the White House foreign policy team. Acting as the national security adviser to President Joe Biden, Sullivan took proactive steps to address the growing technological competition with Asia.

Sullivan assembled a specialized interagency planning exercise directly out of the Situation Room. This high-level coordination brought together various government bodies to focus on a singular threat: the potential for an artificial intelligence arms race. The exercise was not merely theoretical but a practical attempt to prepare the federal government for future conflicts.

The scope of the exercise was defined by a critical question: What are all the possible circumstances and outcomes of an AI arms race between the US and China? The planners aimed to map out a comprehensive strategy that would allow the government to navigate complex geopolitical tensions driven by technological supremacy.

The planning exercise focused on three distinct tiers of conflict and development. These tiers represented the escalating severity of the competition between the two global superpowers.

The first tier involved trade wars. This scenario focused on economic sanctions, export controls, and the battle for supply chain dominance in semiconductor manufacturing. The second tier escalated to real wars, contemplating the use of AI in kinetic military engagements or cyber warfare.

The third and most speculative tier involved the arrival of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). The planners had to consider the geopolitical landscape should a superintelligent system emerge, potentially shifting the balance of global power instantly. The exercise sought to answer how the federal government would respond to each of these escalating possibilities.

The strategic framework established by Jake Sullivan was designed to provide continuity and a long-term vision for US foreign policy regarding technology. However, the implementation of these plans faced significant hurdles.

According to the reporting, the Trump administration took actions that effectively dismantled or destroyed the AI foreign policy initiatives started by the Biden team. This disruption left the US without a cohesive strategy to address the specific challenges of the AI arms race with China.

The destruction of these plans suggests a lack of bipartisan consensus on how to handle the rapid advancement of AI technology. It underscores the challenges national security officials face when trying to maintain strategic consistency across different presidential terms.

The void left by the dismantling of Sullivan's plan creates uncertainty in the relationship between the United States and China. Without a unified federal response, the approach to AI regulation and foreign policy may become fragmented.

The original exercise highlighted the necessity of a coordinated government response. The scenarios ranged from economic disputes to existential threats posed by AGI. The loss of this roadmap means the government may be less prepared to handle sudden escalations in the tech sector.

Ultimately, the situation illustrates the high stakes involved in the intersection of Big Tech and Big Government. The ability to anticipate and react to the AI arms race remains a critical priority for national security, regardless of the administration in power.