Instagram Story speichern

For years, Russia has been expanding its engagement in Africa as part of a broader mission to challenge the existing global order. Russia’s efforts over the past decades have been largely focused on either security—providing military support and/or mercenary forces to regimes in the Sahel, Libya, and Sudan—or engaging in exploitative mining deals aimed at creating long-term dependencies.

Yet even as Russian mercenary forces suffer military setbacks in Mali, Russia continues to project influence across the continent—including beyond the Sahel. In four key “swing states”—Egypt, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and South Africa—Kate Johnston, @valerie_allende, and Isabel Dlabach identify how Russian influence is threatening democracy, undermining local media, and challenging Western influence.

Find the full report at the 🔗in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

Mark Leonard, author of the new book, Surviving Chaos: Geopolitics When the Rules Fail, joins Andrea and Jim on the latest episode of Brussels Sprouts to discuss a new state of durable “unorder,” defined by four big structural forces—climate, chips, capital, and civilizations—along with the biggest source of the chaos behind them: China.

Chaos has become the system, Leonard argues, and rather than looking for order, Europeans should figure out how to have agency.

🎧 Listen to the latest episode through the link in our bio, or wherever you get your podcasts

🆕 from CNAS: Emily Kilcrease and Geoffrey Gertz look at the commercial forces driving AI development and asks: when market incentives shape how AI evolves, do they align with America's security interests?

From chips and data centers to foundation models and applications, the private sector is calling the shots on one of the most consequential dual-use technologies in history. Understanding those market dynamics may unfold will help prepare policymakers and other stakeholders to identify possible market interventions to better align commercial incentives with U.S. national security interests.

📄 Read the paper at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

🆕 from CNAS: Emily Kilcrease and Geoffrey Gertz look at the commercial forces driving AI development and asks: when market incentives shape how AI evolves, do they align with America's security interests?

From chips and data centers to foundation models and applications, the private sector is calling the shots on one of the most consequential dual-use technologies in history. Understanding those market dynamics may unfold will help prepare policymakers and other stakeholders to identify possible market interventions to better align commercial incentives with U.S. national security interests.

📄 Read the paper at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

The United States and China dominate the frontier of artificial intelligence, with control of roughly 90 percent of global computing power and ownership of all 50 of the world’s top foundation models. Alarmed by this concentration of AI power, governments worldwide are investing billions to develop domestic capabilities under the banner of “sovereign AI.”

But what does sovereign AI look like in practice? To answer, the CNAS Sovereign AI Index tracks 140 government-backed AI initiatives across more than 50 countries, mapping how countries are pursuing AI sovereignty.

🔎 Explore key findings from authors Pablo Chavez, Ruby Scanlon, and Vivek Chilukuri and find the full index in our bio

CNAS hosted a fantastic conversation with Chris Pilkerton, Assistant Secretary for Investment Security of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. He and Emily Kilcrease dove into how Treasury hopes to strengthen and streamline investment security programs, key CFIUS initiatives, and the program’s role in broader trade and foreign policy.

🎥 Watch the entire event at the link in our bio

CNAS hosted a fantastic conversation with Chris Pilkerton, Assistant Secretary for Investment Security of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. He and Emily Kilcrease dove into how Treasury hopes to strengthen and streamline investment security programs, key CFIUS initiatives, and the program’s role in broader trade and foreign policy.

🎥 Watch the entire event at the link in our bio

Why does Exercise Balikatan matter?

From Subic Bay, CNAS’s Ryan Claffey explains how this 17,000-person U.S.-Philippines exercise strengthens allied cooperation, reinforces regional deterrence, and signals a shared commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific.

Read more in Ryan’s CNAS report on U.S.–Japan–Philippines trilateral cooperation at CNAS.org

#balikatan #pacific #defense #security #philippines

America needs an economic pressure doctrine.

The U.S. is wielding economic power at a scale we've never seen before. Tariffs. Sanctions. Financial pressure. But without a clear strategy, it's all just noise.

In a world of rising rivals and geopolitical chaos, the U.S. needs more than brute economic force, it needs a doctrine.

📖 Hit It with Your Best Shot by Emily Kilcrease breaks down 20 case studies of American economic pressure and lays out the roadmap Washington needs to coordinate and calibrate modern tools of economic pressure.

Read the full report at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

Twenty-five years of careful relationship-building can unravel faster than most people realize.

The U.S.-India relationship sits at the center of some of the most consequential questions of our time: great-power competition, regional stability, energy transition, supply chain resiliency, technological sovereignty, and the future of the Indo-Pacific order. The past year has tested it. While positive signs have emerged at the start of 2026, there still is a much more needed to get the relationship back on track.

A new report from CNAS tells the story of what went wrong, and more importantly, what comes next.

Find the whole report at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

🌏 New report out now

A new report from CNAS argues that a stronger U.S.-Japan-Philippines trilateral partnership is essential to deterring Chinese aggression and maintaining peace in the region.

With Japan and the Philippines sitting at the heart of the First Island Chain, deeper cooperation between all three nations isn't just smart strategy. It's a necessity.

✍️ Authors Lisa Curtis and Ryan Claffey lay out a roadmap for strengthening security, defense, economic, and diplomatic ties, and sending a clear message to deter PRC aggression.

🔗 Read the full report at the link in bio.

#IndoPacific #NationalSecurity #Japan #Philippines #China #Deterrence #ForeignPolicy

Paul Scharre joins Emily and Geoff to talk about how commercial markets for AI might evolve and how different market outcomes may mean different types of risks for U.S. national security interests. They also get into the ongoing dispute between the Pentagon and Anthropic over who gets to decide how AI is used in the military.

Listen at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc, or wherever you get your podcasts🎙️

Operation Epic Fury is one week in, a new analysis by Stacie Pettyjohn and Philip Sheers asks a critical question: what does the U.S.-Iran campaign cost in America's ability to deter China?

They break down the strategic tradeoffs:

While the U.S. holds deep stockpiles of short-range direct-attack munitions suited for the Iran campaign, four key categories are being drawn down: long-range standoff weapons (Tomahawks, JASSMs), antiship missiles, air defense interceptors, and counter-drone systems, all of which would be most critical in an Indo-Pacific conflict.

Read more at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

Operation Epic Fury is one week in, a new analysis by Stacie Pettyjohn and Philip Sheers asks a critical question: what does the U.S.-Iran campaign cost in America's ability to deter China?

They break down the strategic tradeoffs:

While the U.S. holds deep stockpiles of short-range direct-attack munitions suited for the Iran campaign, four key categories are being drawn down: long-range standoff weapons (Tomahawks, JASSMs), antiship missiles, air defense interceptors, and counter-drone systems, all of which would be most critical in an Indo-Pacific conflict.

Read more at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

Operation Epic Fury is one week in, a new analysis by Stacie Pettyjohn and Philip Sheers asks a critical question: what does the U.S.-Iran campaign cost in America's ability to deter China?

They break down the strategic tradeoffs:

While the U.S. holds deep stockpiles of short-range direct-attack munitions suited for the Iran campaign, four key categories are being drawn down: long-range standoff weapons (Tomahawks, JASSMs), antiship missiles, air defense interceptors, and counter-drone systems, all of which would be most critical in an Indo-Pacific conflict.

Read more at the link in our bio 👉 @cnasdc

How does Trump's use of force in Venezuela and Iran fit into a broader strategic pattern, and what are its limits?

In a new piece for @foreignaffairsmag, @rhfontaine analyzes the defining features of Trump's approach to war: rapid, surprise-driven operations that bypass traditional congressional authorization and avoid long-term military commitments. “The attack on Iran represents the most ambitious of Trump’s foreign policy gambits to date.”

Read more at the link in bio 👉 @cnasdc

How does Trump's use of force in Venezuela and Iran fit into a broader strategic pattern, and what are its limits?

In a new piece for @foreignaffairsmag, @rhfontaine analyzes the defining features of Trump's approach to war: rapid, surprise-driven operations that bypass traditional congressional authorization and avoid long-term military commitments. “The attack on Iran represents the most ambitious of Trump’s foreign policy gambits to date.”

Read more at the link in bio 👉 @cnasdc

How does Trump's use of force in Venezuela and Iran fit into a broader strategic pattern, and what are its limits?

In a new piece for @foreignaffairsmag, @rhfontaine analyzes the defining features of Trump's approach to war: rapid, surprise-driven operations that bypass traditional congressional authorization and avoid long-term military commitments. “The attack on Iran represents the most ambitious of Trump’s foreign policy gambits to date.”

Read more at the link in bio 👉 @cnasdc