Is the only solution creating or resurrecting a new Under Secretary of Defense?
TLDR: The Defense Innovation Board recommends that the Pentagon form a new USD for International Industrial Cooperation (IIC), or alternatively, reconsolidate USD A&S and USD R&E back into USD AT&L to “Optimize Innovation Cooperation with Allies and Partners,” the study's stated objective.
While it is unlikely that DoD will seek and Congress will authorize a new USD by FY26 on the heels of an election, sharing some tactical considerations around the DIB's Leadership and International Cooperation Recommendations that I hope to see the building tiger team before adding another layer of bureaucracy that may have snowball effects across U.S. and international startup industry.
1. How would the proposed USD(IIC) fold into existing security cooperation processes with international partners to enhance and accelerate, not hinder, cooperation with emerging tech companies in partner and allied nations?
OSD Policy, in coordination with the Joint Staff, COCOMs, Country Teams, etc. manage the defense side of our bilateral engagement with partners and allies. Yet, the study focuses more on transforming USD A&S portfolios into a USD(IIC) rather than fold into, or pursue reform of, existing security cooperation processes that include said offices as well as DSCA, the State Dept, and others.
2. Will USD(IIC) be responsible for managing international industry engagement as well as joint international efforts with U.S. industry? For instance, does USD(IIC) become the new gateway for a foreign startup - or a foreign government - and a U.S. startup that have already partnered together?
International engagement is a key, often misunderstood, component of startup strategies, though our startups do face distinct acquisition challenges and the study frequently refers to "industry *and* allies and partners" as one at a time when DoD already struggles with actionable responsiveness to U.S. startups.
3. Getting the personnel right from the get-go is critical to ensuring structural changes, especially one as significant as a new USDship, will in fact accelerate international industry engagement and not simply add a layer of bureaucracy.
? On Manpower: With OSD strapped for manpower and bandwidth amid an unfailingly high tempo, will building and hiring for a new USDship be the most expeditious route to accelerating DoD responsiveness to international industry?
? On Skillset: If USD(IIC) is to be the one-stop-shop for international companies, ideally the personnel boast a very rare duo of defense industry and regional expertise that enable effective engagement with partners and allies.
These considerations highlight a slew of other alternatives to explore: chief among them, integrating international industry-facing personnel into OSD Policy regional shops, clarifying and adopting A&S, R&E, DIU, etc. roles to meet operational gaps, and adopting the DIB's many other core recommendations.