Roundtable Topics

Five Eyes; comprising the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand has been the framework for democratic intelligence collaboration since its inception in 1946. However, as global power becomes increasingly multipolar and intelligence operations shift to the digital landscape, the alliance faces new challenges in the question of modernization. In the age of rapid information dissemination, overclassification and asymmetrical access to classified information creates bottlenecks that hinder collaboration. The five eyes have greatly dictated U.S. intelligence movement among allies. Moving forward, the U.S. and its allies must reconcile the tensions between protecting national interests and fostering deeper cooperation. This requires modernizing classification practices, creating interoperable digital infrastructures, and establishing clearer governance mechanisms to manage political divergence and cyber-espionage threats. How can the U.S. and its allies strengthen secure, equitable intelligence sharing partnerships while protecting national interests and managing the risks of political divergence and digital espionage?

The rapid expansion of global social media platforms has reshaped how states influence foreign audiences. At the same time, adversaries have leveraged platforms to undermine U.S. messaging and amplify anti-U.S. sentiment. As digital platforms assume outsized roles in public discourse, questions are currently rising over how the U.S. government should balance free expression principles and international norms when communicating with foreign publics. Through initiatives like the partnerships with major technology firms, the U.S. has accelerated digital platforms to promote democratic values, counter disinformation, and build trust with foreign publics. Presidential addresses and diplomatic messaging emphasize freedom of expression as a universal right, distinguishing U.S. communication policy from authoritarian regimes that weaponize online platforms for propaganda. As AI and algorithmic technologies transform how information is consumed, U.S. leadership in transparency, digital literacy, and cyber defense becomes central to sustaining credibility in the global information ecosystem. How can the US media image projects of regimes that align with U.S. goals?

The International Space Station (ISS) has been the centerpiece of global scientific collaboration for over two decades, enabling groundbreaking research in microgravity and fostering cooperation among NASA, Roscosmos, ESA, JAXA, and CSA. As the station approaches its planned deorbit in 2030, critical challenges emerge: Russia’s uncertain commitment beyond 2028 threatens controlled deorbiting, while aging infrastructure and rising costs raise questions about sustainability. Congress and NASA face three policy options: commercializing ISS operations, extending its service life, or ending operations altogether, each with implications for science, diplomacy, and industry. Successor frameworks such as Commercial Low Earth Orbit Destinations (CLDs) and the Artemis Accords promise continuity, but the ISS’s retirement will reshape the balance between science, commerce, and geopolitics in space, testing whether international cooperation can endure in a more fragmented environment. More power is given shape by these initiatives. How can the U.S. move information to expand global reach for research?

The Department of Government Efficiency represents a new experiment in government transparency and fiscal oversight, aiming to eliminate waste and streamline spending. However, its informational impact raises serious questions about data transparency, privacy, and accuracy. Looking at redesignation of programs and research contracts within education, Trump’s use of executive power through DOGE has affected the flow of reliable educational data, potentially weakening public trust, and crossed constitutional boundaries. As the Trump Administration maintains DOGE’s role in government systems for cutting wasteful spending, separations of powers are encroached upon in this system. With these changes and system breaks, how can public trust remain consistent while upholding accountable government action for the public domain?

Since the end of the Cold War, Congress chose to reduce the amount of advanced equipment the military would procure. Now, after nearly two decades of fighting an insurgency, the Department of War now must consider the strong possibility of a near-pear conflict with China, Russia, Iran or any other state the US may have tense relations with. The industrial base of the US to manufacture the weapons it needs for war (missiles, ships, planes, bombs) has been projected to be unable to keep pace with war-time demands due to the amount of time it takes to produce these complex weapons. In addition, the military has struggled to maintain its aging equipment and infrastructure, including fuel facilities, strategic bombers, and strategic missile sites. The United States must repair or replace its aging equipment and infrastructure and ensure it has the industrial base to wage a prolonged conflict if it wishes to maintain its seat of power on the world stage. How can the United States improve military readiness by replenishing the strategic stockpile and phasing out old equipment while simultaneously ensuring the process is cost and time effective?

The VA has recently experienced a modernization push greater than seen in previous decades, via reforms such as the PACT Act, GI bill expansions, and expanded transition assistance. Despite these advancements, the VA still faces many longstanding challenges with structural, personnel and technology related issues that hinder effective aid to veterans. By understanding both the current limitations of the VA, it is possible to work to a more efficient, predictive VA system that appropriately addresses the needs of veterans. A persistent issue in family care and the mental health crisis has slowed the U.S. approach in VA system updates. With the federal government implementing A.I. to speed procedures for returning responses and cut costs in the program. Even with programs and post retirement benefits, many veterans struggle to return to civilian life. What operational changes or public image can the federal government change to improve services members transitioning?

In a nation far far away the landscape of warfare was changed. The rise of drone technology in the Russo-Ukrainian war and the imbalance of conventional military power in favor of Russia has required Ukraine to innovate new avenues of warfare that are low cost and effective. As a result, drones have become a crucial part of the Ukrainian defense strategy, more particularly the “drone wall” has provided Ukraine with a way to take advantage of the conventional structure of the Russian military to inflict significant damage. Current U.S. armed forces lack the ability to compete in guerilla combat without major costs. How can the U.S. adapt current defense (military) strategies to accommodate the rise of a new type of technological guerilla warfare utilized by smaller, less wealthy, and less advanced military powers?

The Pacific and Arctic has become an incredibly important region due to its wealth of natural resources and its crucial intercontinental shipping routes. Alaska represents the United States’ only sovereign Arctic territory and provides critical access to the Bering Strait, Arctic approaches, and high-latitude air and missile corridors. The operational environment poses severe constraints, limited infrastructure, extreme climate, and degraded communications, that require purpose-built capabilities. Within this environment, Alaskan Command (ALCOM) serves as the forward edge of U.S. homeland defense, integrating joint air, missile, and multi-domain operations to counter Russian proximity and monitor growing Chinese activity. As Russia solidifies its Arctic posture and China deepens economic and diplomatic influence, Alaska’s strategic location ensures it remains the United States’ principal platform for deterrence, domain awareness, and sustained Arctic engagement. How can the US use its resources in the region to counter Russian and Chinese influence?

Over the past two decades, cyberattacks began as isolated breaches of IT systems has evolved into a form of strategic competition and criminal enterprise capable of disrupting essential economic functions that threaten food security. Business operations, agricultural production, and international trade are now so deeply intertwined with digital systems that cyber intrusions can produce immediate and far-reaching consequences. The risks will continue to grow unless governments, businesses, and technology providers adopt more resilient and coordinated cybersecurity strategies. For policymakers, the challenge is twofold: strengthening immediate defenses against emerging threats while building long-term frameworks that promote secure innovation. Understanding the historical development of these threats, as well as their implications for the future, is essential for shaping responses that can preserve economic stability and national security. What mix of regulatory standards, public–private partnerships, and international agreements will be necessary to secure an increasingly digitized economy?

The economic foundation of U.S. power projection increasingly relies on internal renewal, particularly in former industrial regions. Once defined by deindustrialization and population decline, the American industry revival is being repositioned as a hub for AI-driven energy infrastructure. Required factors necessary for the expansion of AI, including infrastructure, public and private backing, and, importantly, the expansion of electricity capacity. New investments through the CHIPS Act and Inflation Reduction Act have incentivized semiconductor fabrication, hydrogen production, and clean microgrid. As AI data centers demand massive energy inputs, the co-location of renewable and nuclear power sources in former manufacturing zones symbolizes a reintegration of America’s industrial base with the emerging AI-energy.

College today is more expensive than it has ever been with more students than there have ever been. As a result, the job market for college graduates has become hyper competitive, and wages relative to inflation have declined among a population where 70% have some form of student loan debt. Moreover, the rise of Artificial intelligence and its potential uses in the workforce has placed tremendous pressure on the white collar sectors as they look to adapt to an increasingly AI focused environment. This has led young professionals in the U.S. to be placed in a very precarious position, stuck between both the threat of high debt and wage decline leading to lower return on investment for college, and AI based automation exacerbating these concerns. How can the U.S. policymakers adequately address these concerns and find a way to balance people and progress amidst this crisis of confidence?

The Trump administration expanded the use of tariffs as a coercive tool to extract economic and political concessions from both adversaries and allies. While intended to enhance U.S. bargaining power, retaliatory measures and counter-sanctions contributed to economic slowdowns and heightened market uncertainty. These effects are particularly acute in critical mineral markets, where China controls roughly 90 percent of global rare earth or  refining capacity, leaving the United States vulnerable to supply disruptions in technology and semi-conductors. Broad and punitive tariff policies have further destabilized mineral markets, The Department of Energy (DOE) Critical Materials Program has contributed to maintaining economic flow of REMs. To ensure U.S. prosperity while limiting economic contraction, trade policy must shift toward targeted, conditional measures coordinated with allies, alongside sustained investment in domestic and allied supply chains.

When the People’s Republic of China first emerged onto the global stage, it was viewed by the world as a mere regional power. However, in the 1990s tensions began to develop as China began efforts to expand its sphere of influence. By the 2000s it was clear that China was developing at a much faster pace than previously expected. This fact, along with other regional developments, led to a US foreign policy shift focused on the Indo-Pacific. Since 2000 China has rapidly grown into a power that approaches the US economically, militarily, and diplomatically. It exerts considerable influence on the Indo-Pacific through far-reaching economic partnerships, while it simultaneously strengthens its military standing through partnerships with Russia, North Korea, and a host of smaller nations. As China’s influence continues to grow the US must constantly reevaluate its Indo-Pacific policy in terms of its economic partnerships and military alliances.

In early 2021, the dream of a democratic Myanmar died when the Tatmadaw, its armed forces, overthrew the democratically-elected government in response to its own party’s defeat in the 2020 election. This coup d’etat sparked protests and eventually armed insurrection that boiled into full blown civil war that still rages as of late 2024. In addition to widespread devastation economically and environmentally, the Myanmar Civil War has seen the nation broken down along ethnic lines, with armed groups centered around specific ethnicities aligned both for and against the military government. This has resulted in a worrying increase of ethnic violence in the country. The Rohingya people especially have suffered immensely due to the crisis, being displaced internally and externally. With Myanmar being located right on China’s doorstep, its position is critical within the Indo-Pacific region. It is the moral and strategic responsibility of the United States to determine a response that best addresses the needs of the people of Myanmar while best securing American interests in the region.

The hermit kingdom no longer–in the year 2024 the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea charts a new course amidst an inflamed world. Long content to maintain threadbare relations with China and Russia and threaten South Korea and its allies, , the Kim dynasty has forged stronger partnerships with two of the United States’s greatest competitors: Russia and China. With China, North Korea has recommitted itself to their long standing mutual-defense pact, and in economic matters Beijing remains North Korea’s strongest trading partner. In the midst of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Kim’s Korea has become an arsenal of autocracy, starting in 2023 when the nation sent a thousand containers full of munitions for the Russian war effort. In late 2024, North Korea further involved itself in the conflict by sending thousands of troops to assist their ally. Kim Jong Un has made it clear that he is no longer content to sit in isolation–how will the U.S. and South Korea respond to an emboldened North Korea?

The outbreak of the Israel-Palestine War in late 2023 sparked a flame that threatens to consume the entire Middle East. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and stand as an ‘Axis of Resistance’ against the U.S., Israel, and their allies, all at the behest of their puppetmaster: the Islamic Republic of Iran. At Iran’s urging, these groups strike an ever expanding list of targets; population centers, international shipping, and even American forces are free game. And yet, through concerted efforts undertaken by the State of Israel, with support from the United States, the so-called Axis of Resistance has been significantly reduced. Hezbollah and Hamas’s leadership and military capabilities have been decimated through Israeli air and ground operations. Assad’s Syria, Iran’s closest regional state partner, has collapsed, leaving Syria in the hands of a myriad of rebel groups opposed to Iran. Among the ashes, the United States and its allies have a unique opportunity to fill the void left by the Axis of Resistance’s collapse, and strike a permanent blow to Iran’s proxy network.

Once, the global economy shuddered at the prospect of the interruption of trade caused by rampant piracy, most prominently in the Horn of Africa and Red Sea. In 2011 alone, there were over 200 reported attacks by pirates on merchant vessels, causing significant financial losses. In the period from 2005 to 2012, nearly 20 billion dollars yearly were lost due to disruptions caused by piracy. In response, the United Nations, NATO, and EU created a multilateral response force devoted solely to antipiracy. These efforts were highly successful, and by 2022 attacks had dropped to barely a dozen per year. However, in the face of the Israel-Palestine war, anti-maritime piracy has seen a resurgence in the Horn of Africa, but most prominently in the Red Sea. Houthi rebels have launched anti-ship missiles and even daring helicopter-borne assaults against merchant vessels. To combat this return of piracy, past efforts in anti-piracy must be re-examined to ensure the lifelines of global trade remain open.

The devastating terror attacks perpetrated by Hamas against the State of Israel on October 7th, 2023, have brought a long running conflict back into the forefront of global attention. The war has spilled over into many theaters, from economic with trade disruption in the Red Sea, to even outer space. However, the conflict has entered a more pervasive theater, one that plays a key role in everyday life—the media. Both sides of the conflict  have used traditional forms of media as well as social media to further their interests. Scores of footage posted to social media, depicting alleged attacks or atrocities have in fact often been found to be footage from other conflicts, or even recorded from video games. Governments and groups have undertaken information operations in order to influence opinion and government officials. With the conflict entering its second year, the perception of the war and even how it is carried out relies heavily on media coverage—and those who shape it.

The intake of refugees in Europe involves both fiscal implications and humanitarian responsibilities, as global conflicts drive significant inflows, creating economic pressures in housing, education, and healthcare. This strain on public finances can lead to restrictive policies and public resentment, complicating integration efforts. Insufficient investment in language and cultural integration programs exacerbates isolation and tensions, potentially leading to conflicts. Addressing these issues requires balancing fiscal constraints with effective integration programs to foster mutual understanding, social stability, and cohesion.

The Biological Weapons Convention and Chemical Weapons Convention were created in an effort to promote international cooperation while setting necessary limitations on weapon utilizations in wartime scenarios. Despite both conventions prohibiting the creation, distribution, and use of chemical and biological weapons, Russia has recently faced backlash for violating the CWC during their full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Their use of chemical weapons to support their offensive strategies have prompted the United States to enforce sanctions on multiple Russian entities tied to the violation. As Russia is a signatory state to both weapon conventions, it is necessary to address both the impacts of such violations on international stability, as well as potential avenues to revise and re-enforce the restrictions set upon chemical and biological weapons. Russia’s historical and contemporary association with these weapons has caused mass harm on Ukrainian citizens and the effectiveness of international weapon cooperation.

The evolving political landscape in Europe, shaped by the rise of far-right agendas, poses significant challenges for NATO and U.S. defense strategy. This shift pressures the U.S. to navigate alliances where nationalism may overshadow collective security interests, complicating transatlantic cooperation and military readiness. As NATO’s leader, the U.S. must reassess strategies to align defense priorities with allies’ changing domestic politics while preserving NATO’s unity and effectiveness. This roundtable will explore how the U.S. can strengthen NATO’s core principles amid these challenges, considering threats from authoritarian regimes and regional instability. Key discussion points include diplomatic strategies to strengthen alliances, enhance military collaboration, and foster resilience within NATO. By addressing these issues, participants aim to ensure the alliance remains a cornerstone of U.S. defense policy and a unified force in promoting security and democratic values across an evolving European political environment.

Haiti’s independence was won through a bloody slave rebellion, and as a parting gift its former French masters forced immense debt upon the fledgling nation under threat of naval bombardment. This immense debt and other political crises have led to a cyclical series of dictatorships and republics, characterized by economic stagnation and political instability. The current cycle of instability seems to have reached a head with the 2021 assassination of President Moïse in 2021. The already unstable government suffered complete collapse following this, fleeing abroad and establishing a near-powerless “Transitional Council”. Today, Haiti is a warzone – controlled by gangs and armed groups. The remaining government forces have been largely slaughtered and control little of the country. Limited material support from the United States and armed intervention by Kenya has only succeeded in carving out a few islands of stability among the Haitian anarchy. A collapsed Haiti presents not only danger as an outpost for drug production and other illicit activities, but a black mark on the United States’s ability to support its neighbors in the Americas.

The ongoing opioid epidemic has seen unprecedented levels of fentanyl and methamphetamine enter the country, largely stemming from one general source: cartels and non-state actors in Central and South America. These non-state groups, allowed to operate largely unheeded due to government instability and corruption, comprise a vast network stretching from Mexico to Brazil. The prevalence of illicit drugs and non-state groups that produce them are a grave threat to not only domestic public health, but U.S. and regional security. The mitigation of these non-state groups is an imperative course of action that must be taken to protect American citizens and interests.

In December 2023, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela held a sham-referendum over annexing the oil-rich region of Essequibo in neighboring Guyana. This territory has long been claimed by Venezuela as their own, stemming from colonial-era disputes over ownership of the region. The referendum passed, and the Venezuelan government now considers Essequibo a state of Venezuela. Though the government has ordered the printing of material depicting the Essequibo as part of their nation, no military action has been taken to make it a reality. However, the heavily contested July 2024 elections which saw Nicolas Maduro re-elected for an unprecedented third term, in an election widely believed to be fraudulent, represent the culmination of decades of democratic backsliding and the erosion of any checks on Maduro. With little resistance in his way, Maduro possesses no internal pushback on any policy including any against Guyana. The United States and its Carribean partners must reconsider Maduro’s ambitions, and be prepared for any action taken by the rogue state.

The United States, as characterized by President John F. Kennedy has long been a nation of immigrants. Yet, in the year 2024 the organs of state responsible for legal immigration into the United States have been overwhelmed by a huge wave of migration from the Southern border, originating not only from Mexico but from Central and South America. Instability in our own backyard has led to millions of people fleeing north with the hopes of securing a better life for themselves and their families. Yet, among the huddled masses seeking to better themselves, exist a few bad actors that threaten American national security. The United States must chart a course that addresses the real needs of those seeking refuge while also ensuring domestic security.

Domestic terrorism is a violent act committed within the United States by individuals or groups driven by ideological, political, racial, or religious motives. This threat has evolved over time, from the Ku Klux Klan to modern mass shootings fueled by white supremacy, anti-government beliefs, or other extremist ideologies. These acts endanger American lives, challenge national security, and threaten the nation’s core values of freedom, equality, and democracy. A comprehensive approach is necessary, balancing vigilance and the protection of civil liberties, and adapting to the changing times. This means partnerships across government levels, communities, and private entities are crucial to maintaining a network to combat threats. The Biden Administration’s 2021 National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism marked a federal push towards addressing these threats, but much work still remains.

Space is now a battlefield. The fragile norms and agreements that have kept space free from militarization smolder above a world aflame. Space forces, from Colorado Springs to Krasnoznamensk, plan on how to fight and win the next war in space. Above the war-torn fields of Ukraine, both sides of the nearly three-year long conflict make extensive use of satellites in communications and targeting. In the Pacific, China has restructured its space forces into a new independent arm, and continues to rapidly grow its satellite fleet. The Russian deployment of a nuclear-capable satellite into orbit in early 2024 is merely the tip of the iceberg. The importance of space to not only our modern way of life, but to modern warfare. If these United States are to weather the flames of a world in conflict, the final frontier must be tamed.

After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022, questions arose over what Western democracies in the free world owe Ukraine and how much they should invest in ensuring Ukraine’s security. Ukraine became the first nation to voluntarily give up their nuclear arsenal after being put under pressure by larger powers, including the U.S. Due to these actions, Ukraine faces limited security guarantees. How may stepping towards the United States strategy of integrated deterrence secure Ukraine a victory? Will the U.S. use Ukraine’s fight against Russia as a lesson to help other countries? How can the United States best help Ukraine develop a foothold in their war with Russia?

China has the potential to supplant the United States as a new world power. The rise of China and the preponderance of Asian-centric international order, has left the fate of American hegemony hanging in the balance. Beijing’s current political and economic initiatives, especially under Xi Jinping, have led to both problems and progress regionally and globally. Aggressive ‘Wolf Warrior’ diplomacy has helped to establish China’s political dominance in the region. Xi’s “Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation” and China’s increased assertiveness and aggression as a result, have degraded regional stability in the Asian Pacific and poses a near-peer threat to the United States and its security interests. How can the U.S. determine a diplomatic solution to slow China’s great rejuvenation while also strengthening their own claim to global dominance?

Though the U.S. intelligence systems are highly innovative and essential in maintaining both an international and national security advantage, it is clear that intelligence is not immune to failure. Since the creation of the Central Intelligence Agency, the United State’s most prominent intelligence-gathering service, failure to predict, analyze, and assess certain situations has stimulated a need to evaluate why intelligence fails, and identify the components that play a role in these failures. The U.S. can make great strides to strengthen its intelligence system by looking at key examples of foreign and domestic intelligence failures, addressing human error, overall inevitability, and the risks of politicizing intelligence. How can the U.S. best learn from its mistakes to prevent them from happening in the future? How can the U.S. prevent its intelligence systems from falling victim to human error and politicization?

Great powers require great allies. In the coming decades as increased global tension and economic hardship persist, alliances will determine the future of great powers such as the United States. American defense strategy today is predicated upon the concept of integrated deterrence; the increased importance of American partnerships and allies to defend against the threats posed by the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation. With the return of great power competition, American military primacy in itself cannot be relied on entirely to support and defend American national interests. A traditional component and a valuable multiplier of American military and economic strength lies in our large and robust network of multilateral and bilateral alliances, famously including NATO, and more recently, AUKUS. How can the U.S. better recognize and utilize alliances worldwide to strengthen its global prowess?

The world is turning the corner on a new age of technology. Rapid technology advancements are essential to the security of the United States. With the rise of artificial intelligence and its potential capabilities, as well as weapons advancement, the United States must weigh the security risks new weapons systems could bring, with the ethical concerns of unleashing AI upon the world. The revived space race has implemented new technology in the public and private sector. Cyber technology is constantly advancing, and providing new opportunities for countries to distinguish themselves as a forerunner in technological supremacy. China, Russia, the United States, and the EU are all caught up in the same questions. Who will be the first to create advanced weapons? What will they do with their knowledge? What will the consequences be?

In this decisive decade, America turns its eyes skywards. The emerging private space industry has become an increasingly important vehicle for our return to the final frontier. Companies such as SpaceX not only produce launch vehicles for government use but also conduct their own launches and operations themselves. However, this increased collaboration creates complications. Existing regulation on commercial space activities takes its foundations from treaties signed before we even landed on the Moon. These same treaties also hold governments solely responsible for the actions of their companies regardless of their actual involvement. How do we ensure space companies support American interests in space? How can we strengthen and incentivize the relationship between the private and public space sectors?

Manufacturing facilities and factories are quickly becoming a battleground in a silent war on intelligence. Industrial espionage is often overlooked as a threat to U.S. success. The theft of intellectual property and business trade secrets is often closely tied to foreign governments which poses a significant risk to national security. This is most common in software development, biotechnology, aerospace, telecommunications, energy, transportation, and coating industries; those most critical to the operations and success of the United States. The United States cannot maintain its competitive edge on the world stage while losing 100 billion dollars per year in market share to corporate spying. Combating industrial espionage is essential to fortifying the strength of the American economy at home and abroad. How can policy initiatives help to secure our industries without hindering the efficiency of American businesses?

For America to persist as a leader in technological, industrial, and cultural supremacy the U.S. must take steps to invest in people. Human capital is the cornerstone on which innovation and power are built. In order to put a focus on people the U.S. must emphasize education and immigration by orienting policies around prioritizing people. Policies should strive to set up future generations with the tools necessary to make an innovative impact in the world. The U.S. must also take greater strides to push policy initiatives that benefit American companies and incentivize them to keep their business in America. How can the U.S. frame policies towards improving American people and business?

Countries around the world have joined hands, forming economic and political forums in order to strengthen their future as a nation. G7 and BRICS represent two distinct economic blocs, each with independent initiatives and potentially conflicting priorities. The G7 countries are focused on initiatives like cutting-edge technology, sustainable development, and global health security. The rise and expansion of BRICS is transforming the global economy and challenging the US-led world economic order. Decreased reliance on the US dollar and international institutions can have lasting political implications. How can the U.S. harness the competition between G7 and Brics to create policies that benefit the U.S. economy?

China’s Belt and Road Initiative is a global project primarily intended to export excess industrial capacity to developing countries using Chinese materials, workers, and predatory lending practices. Secondary to building infrastructure, the initiative intends to obtain access to ports throughout the Indo-Pacific and expand transportation networks to enable goods to flow from China to Europe. This Chinese lending scheme filled the vacuum left by the lack of financial assistance from the West by turning aid into an investment opportunity, securing access to commodities and ports in return for infrastructure investment. The United States and, more broadly, the collective West, must articulate a competitive response to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

Warfare has the potential to extend further than just the traditional aspects of combat. Weaponizing refugees has become a highly strategic form of political warfare. By instrumentalizing human movement that normally arises from a conflict within a home country, actors can intentionally use refugee flow as a means to gain political superiority. Weaponizing refugees to stimulate large immigration pools from one country to another can not only be characterized as a humanitarian crisis for the intentionality of human displacement, it poses a monumental challenge to the national security of the receiving country. The exploitative tactics carried out by countries to successfully weaponize refugees can be exemplified in many different ways, but primarily are all associated with threatening the use of refugees as a means of coercion. How can the U.S. influence and create policies to help end the inhumane practice of weaponizing refugees?

Following the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, food prices have reached record highs. Food volatility leaves uncertainty felt worldwide, especially by countries already struggling from malnourishment. If global powers do not intervene, food and nutrition insecurity rates will rise drastically. On the other hand, food is wasted each year, malnutrition and processed food cause high obesity rates, food distribution failures cause massive ‘food deserts’, and soil degradation is quickly depleting farmable land all while the global population also continues to rise. How can the United States redistribute wasted food and supply starving regions to better handle food insecurity, as well as create a stable food supply for decades to come?

The United States serves as a haven for immigrants around the world. However, the U.S. Immigration system is under scrutiny for inefficiency in handling increasing amounts of refugees and immigrants seeking a home in the United States. Massive illegal immigration from the southern border only draws more attention to the issue and leaves the country vulnerable to security threats. The two categories of the immigration system addressed are the process for immigrants receiving visas, as well as applying for citizenship. Additionally addressing the economic impact of immigration into the U.S. and how policies can help to utilize America’s greatest resource, people. How can the U.S. address the rising illegal immigration problem by improving the legal immigration system?

Despite being designed as a platform for expression and creativity, the rapid rise of social media has exacerbated the spread of unreliable and unverified information. The accessibility and popularity of social media allows anyone to be involved and makes massive amounts of information consumable. These platforms are supplanting credible news sources and constantly accelerating the spread and intensity of sociopolitical movements. In many instances, freedom of expression clashes with censorship efforts to screen and remove misleading or inaccurate information. Selective algorithms serve as an echo chamber for like-minded users, incurring risks of radicalization and deepening polarization. Misinformation is further complicated by rapidly developing technologies such as deepfakes and other applications of AI that make discovering and sharing the truth far more difficult. How will the U.S. tackle the growing threat of misinformation while still guarding the United States core values of freedom?

2024 will generate one of the most intricate and anxiety-inducing presidential elections in recent decades. The U.S. electoral system, both at the State and National levels, is being put under increased discontent by American citizens. Reforms are necessary to help make elections more efficient and fair. There are many different nuts and bolts of the electoral system process, electoral candidate qualifications, the Electoral College, and rank choice voting, are some of the many topics that have been facing increasing revisement. With growing population sizes and modernized technology, it’s only logical our election system continues to progress at the same speed as society. Upholding democratic values is essential to keeping the integrity of the American electoral system. What will the next steps be in improving the electoral system?

The climate impacts every single country, industry and individual on the planet and results in a battle on all fronts that cannot be easily won. Natural disasters, resource crises, and approaching deadlines threaten national security in a way that cannot be ignored. Environmental degradation threatens to destroy markets and provide major public health concerns. Most governments and scientists take the stance of either alarmism or denialism when discussing climate change. Finding the middle ground is necessary to create the most cost-efficient and effective solution to help mitigate the consequences of climate change. As America approaches this new decade, how will the U.S. work to mitigate damages, improve conditions, and prevent further escalation of the climate crisis?

The United States has come a long way since the non-interventionist sentiment of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823. Since then, over the course of over a century of wars, the United States now stands more involved on the global stage than ever. Because of this, the U.S. holds many alliances. Some of these are for economic gain, such as Mexico and Canada, as members of the USMCA. Some of these alliances, such as every member of NATO, serve largely as militaristic alliances, in case one member gets drawn into war. Our enemies, mainly China, Russia, and Iran, also work together, mostly behind the scenes, in order to strengthen each other in the fight against us. What stance can the U.S. take on its alliances that will serve to further its interests? Should it continue being in alliance with economically weaker nations who tend to draw out more than they return, or is that philanthropy something the U.S. has a duty to continue? What can we do with our allies in order to combat the rise of our enemies

Over the past decade social media has become one of the easily accessible forms of communication and news sharing. This ease of access has been increasingly taken advantage of by foreign state and domestic actors. In both 2016 and 2020, Russian interference with U.S. elections was a top concern. Recently in 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ignited another information war, with both sides using media platforms to leverage the battle. For many reasons, one of them being the debate over government interference with private industry, the U.S. has been slow to address disinformation within social media. How can the government address disinformation within private media companies? What solutions are most viable considering the current constraints against corporate interference? How can private industry work together in conjunction with government?

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. witnessed supply chain failures like never before. Grocery store shelves were empty, and shipping times were doubled or even tripled. More recently the supply of oil was in question as Russia invaded Ukraine and upended European supply chains. Operating in an interdependent economic system, the U.S. can control very little when it comes to supply chain mishaps. In order for the U.S. to secure supply chains and minimize the effect global events have on the ability to put food on the table, the country will need to rethink how it operates. What strategies can the U.S. use to ensure stability in times of crisis? What is the most common problem affecting supply chains and are there sustainable solutions? Does the U.S. need to rethink its dependence on foreign entities for supplying key products?

The US has been lucky in a sense that the Ukraine conflict has had a limited effect on the domestic economy, compared to other countries who are more entwined with Russia and Ukraine. This might not always be the case, as tensions have continued to brew in East Asia, particularly with China and North Korea. The US technology market is very involved with Asian companies, and would take a drastic hit if conflict were to arise in the area. How can the US work to foresee and prevent disruptions with economic partners? Can the US take any domestic measures to minimize possible foreign disruptions with the economy?

Access to a wide variety of energy sources is vital for a nation’s strength. This was apparent during the Summer 2022, as the war in Ukraine destabilized oil prices. Although America largely runs on fossil fuels, it does possess a number of renewable energy sources as well, such as solar, wind, or hydroelectric, and also some nuclear energy capabilities. However, in comparison to fossil fuels, the total energy produced by these alternative sources is almost insignificant. For a number of reasons, a main one being potential climate change, it seems important that America strengthen its use of alternative energy sources. However, in doing so it is vital it doesn’t lower its national security capabilities. What are the best next steps for America to make this change in their energy production? Which of the alternatives seems most promising, and what realistically can be done to carry out its implementation? How can America reduce reliance on foreign partners going forward?

China has replaced Russia as the next great threat to the US and its status as a world superpower. China has been rivaling the US in multiple facets, such as hypersonic missile technology and Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology. They have also expanded into the South China Sea despite being condemned by the international community. Through their Belt and Road initiative, they have expanded their trade infrastructure to new levels. What efforts can the US take to limit stealing of intellectual property that would aid China? What should the US military do to achieve and maintain battlefield superiority? What efforts should be taken to limit Chinese influence outside of Asia (ie: Africa, Eastern Europe)?

The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine was a surprise for some, and expected by others. Through acquired intelligence, the US had been anticipating the invasion for months, while other countries believed Russia was bluffing. While the world was quick to react with sanctions and military support for Ukraine, it had underestimated Russia and President Putin’s commitment. However, the US and its allies have gained much needed information on how Russia operates on the 21st century battlefield. What can the US military take advantage of from Russian military strategy? Should the US begin to strengthen its plans for a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan? How can the US effectively limit Russian capabilities while limiting direct involvement?

The global refugee crisis, exacerbated by conflicts and political instability in the Middle East, Central America, and Eastern Europe is far from over. The U.S. has historically been a recipient of displaced refugees, and has given resources to assist in the crisis, but has also been a participant in many of the conflicts that create refugees. How can the US balance policy initiatives while taking account of the possibility of displaced people? Can the US work in conjunction with foreign partners to evenly distribute the weight of the crisis? What can the government do to assist refugees that enter the US?

Since the start of the war in February 2022, the U.S. has been very vocal about sending aid to Ukraine, and calling on its allies to do the same. However the U.S. does not have the best international reputation for rebuilding war-torn nations, especially after the Afghanistan withdrawal in 2021. With the U.S. devoting the amount of physical and financial resources to the Ukrainian government, it is also expected to help lead the country in recovery following the conflict. How can the U.S. learn from past conflicts and apply lessons learned to Ukraine? What resources does the U.S. have available that can be deployed following the conflict. What role/responsibilities should the U.S. take on?

The US intelligence community has always been an invaluable asset to the policy making process. Combined with allied intelligence agreements, such as of Five Eyes (FVEY) they have been able to stay ahead of many potential threats. Although at times there have been false reports that have wrongly influenced policy decisions, such as the supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, which led to an overwhelming support to send in US troops. Other times US intelligence stood against the grain and proved doubters wrong, correctly predicting the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Spring 2022. However, US intelligence holds a pivotal place in the country’s policy making process, and the ability to keep intelligence non-politicized and effective is paramount. How has the political climate of the US downgraded the intelligence community? What steps can the US take to more thoroughly vet intelligence? How can the US preserve intelligence sharing relations with foreign partners?

The US is defending itself on more than just land, air, and water. Cyberspace and even outer space are contenders for future battlefronts. The acronym ‘DIME’ (Diplomatic, Informational, Military, and Economic) has become a staple in the intelligence community, defining areas of strategic importance. However, as the 21st century evolves, threats are beginning to appear in less tangible forms. Cyber attacks by China and Russia have wreaked havoc on US infrastructure, and the US will need to step up its ability to combat new threats such as these in the future. How can the US learn from past incidents to bolster its defenses? What can the intelligence community do to better address and prevent imminent attacks in all domains? Does the US need to update its military/defensive doctrine to adapt to 21st century threats?

The US is one of the world’s largest arms exporters, selling weapons and tactical systems to every corner of the globe. This is great for the economy, but also poses a significant risk that technologies may be sold to foreign enemies, possibly compromising the United States’ strategic advantage. There is also the concern that US sourced arms could find their way being aimed back at US troops on the battlefield. How can US agencies better track and catalog foreign arms sales? What possible loopholes need to be closed to prevent ‘friendly fire’ incidents? Does there need to be changes to existing trade agreements to help protect US technologies?