AICOA Raises National Security Concerns
AICOA does not address serious national security concerns that experts have continued to warn the legislation raises. These concerns have become more pressing in light of the current geopolitical landscape, but the amended version of AICOA does not meaningfully address these concerns.
Here’s what to read to get up to speed:
1) The proposed anti-tech bills “make it harder for American tech companies to keep up the pace of innovation, but they’ll also put serious roadblocks in the way of our country gaining leadership on the strategic technologies of the future” and could have a “devastating” impact on our national security, warn former Senators Kent Conrad (D-ND) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA).
2) Tech companies’ “role in Ukraine shows how they are becoming a key asset in the West’s rivalry with Russia and China,” explains Greg Ip, The Wall Street Journal’s Chief Economics Commentator, adding that “cost, features and reliability will be the main determinants of whose technology wins the global competition for influence. But values will play a role, too.”
3) As reported by CyberScoop, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has “indicated the intelligence community will not be offering blanket approval of the antitrust bill,” in spite of “pressure” from AICOA’s co-sponsors to say that the bill does not imperil cyber and national security.
4) “Before Congress takes the misguided step of imposing undue restrictions on our major Big Tech firms, it needs to seriously address the potential negative effects such legislation would have on U.S. national security,” cautions Daniel Goure, Senior Vice President at the Lexington Institute.
5) When discussing why the anti-tech bills have stalled, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) recently stated, “The security concerns are catching up with the [AICOA and the Open App Markets Act].”
6) AICOA “will place U.S. companies at a structural disadvantage” relative to China, and the revised version of the bill “does not ameliorate our concerns,” caution former Director of the National Economic Council Larry Kudlow, former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, former Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller, and 10 other officials.
7) AICOA “would constrain U.S. companies from removing malicious actors and integrating cybersecurity tools to their platforms, possibly leaving U.S. tech infrastructure vulnerable to America’s foreign adversaries,” explain former DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson and former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien.
8) “There are significant cybersecurity concerns in the bill” that “do the exact opposite of what we want in cybersecurity, which is incentivizing companies not to improve cybersecurity but instead creates significant logjams to software upgrades and proactive security applications,” warns former U.S. Cyberspace Solarium Commission official Tatyana Bolton.
9) The revised AICOA does “not address the problems identified by national security experts, economists, and consumer advocates,” explains the CCIA’s Krisztian Katona.
10) AICOA’s “new version acknowledges—but fails to address—any of the national security concerns raised in our open letter,” warns former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
11) AICOA “could in fact increase cybersecurity risks,” warns former NSA general counsel Glenn Gerstell.
12) Anti-tech legislation could put sensitive U.S. data and IP in the hands of Beijing, warn twelve former top U.S. national security officials in an open letter.
13) AICOA “would require leading U.S. tech companies to grant competitors ‘access and interoperability’ to operating systems, hardware and software features,” including foreign rivals, warns Former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.
See here for more from Springboard on AICOA’s national security concerns.