As autonomous weapon systems become increasingly lethal, the battlefield will be too dangerous for human soldiers. The founder of Allen Control Systems argues that conflict will transform into 'robot on robot action,' where victory is determined not by soldiers, but by which nation can produce the most effective systems at the lowest cost.
Related Insights
Onshoring is not possible by replicating China's labor-intensive model, making autonomous robots a necessity. Simultaneously, the strategic, dual-use nature of this technology makes it imperative to develop these robots domestically. This creates a powerful feedback loop where the technology enables onshoring while the need for the technology drives it.
It's futile to debate *whether* transformative technologies like AI and robotics should be developed. If a technology offers a decisive advantage, it *will* be built, regardless of the risks. The only rational approach is to accept its inevitability and focus all energy on managing its implementation to stay ahead.
The conflict in Ukraine exposed the vulnerability of expensive, "exquisite" military platforms (like tanks) to inexpensive technologies (like drones). This has shifted defense priorities toward cheap, mass-producible, "attritable" systems. This fundamental change in product and economics creates a massive opportunity for startups to innovate outside the traditional defense prime model.
The development of AI won't stop because of game theory. For competing nations like the US and China, the risk of falling behind is greater than the collective risk of developing the technology. This dynamic makes the AI race an unstoppable force, mirroring the Cold War nuclear arms race and rendering calls for a pause futile.
Leading AI companies, facing high operational costs and a lack of profitability, are turning to lucrative government and military contracts. This provides a stable revenue stream and de-risks their portfolios with government subsidies, despite previous ethical stances against military use.
The decisive advantage in future conflicts will not be just technological superiority, but the ability to mass-produce weapons efficiently. After decades of offshoring manufacturing, re-industrializing the US to produce hardware at scale is Anduril's core strategic focus, viewing the factory itself as the ultimate weapon.
Countering the common narrative, Anduril views AI in defense as the next step in Just War Theory. The goal is to enhance accuracy, reduce collateral damage, and take soldiers out of harm's way. This continues a historical military trend away from indiscriminate lethality towards surgical precision.
While the West may lead in AI models, China's key strategic advantage is its ability to 'embody' AI in hardware. Decades of de-industrialization in the U.S. have left a gap, while China's manufacturing dominance allows it to integrate AI into cars, drones, and robots at a scale the West cannot currently match.
The war in Ukraine has evolved from a traditional territorial conflict into a "robot war," with drones dominating the front lines. This real-world battlefield is accelerating innovation at an "unbelievable" pace, driving new solutions for secure communications and autonomous targeting, providing critical lessons for US drone strategy.
The US military's 30-year strategy, born from the Gulf War, of relying on small numbers of technologically superior weapons is flawed. The war in Ukraine demonstrates that protracted, industrial-scale conflicts are won by mass and production volume, not just technological sophistication.
