|
Jensen Huang, CEO of Nvidia, the world's largest AI chip manufacturer, at CES 2025 in Las Vegas, January 6, 2025 Photo by Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Reuters
|
Chinese AI firm DeepSeek recently made headlines with its new AI models, reportedly created at a fraction of the cost of similar U.S.-built products. Some argue that DeepSeek’s breakthrough means that the U.S. export controls designed to keep advanced AI chips away from China have backfired and should be lifted. But according to RAND's Ashley Lin and Lennart Heim, DeepSeek’s success in fact underscores the need for smarter export controls.
Export controls must become more targeted and responsive to new developments in AI. And the agency responsible for export controls, the Bureau of Industry and Security, could be empowered to increase its capabilities for detecting and preventing export control violations.
Enhancing export controls is key to a broader strategy to counter China’s AI ambitions and maintain U.S. leadership in computing power, Lin and Heim argue. By contrast, lifting export controls and allowing an unrestricted flow of advanced AI chips to China could squander America's technological advantage at a critical moment.
|
|
|
|
|
The sudden ouster of the Assad regime late last year raises an important question: Can the 6 million people who became refugees during Syria’s 14-year civil war now go home? According to RAND's Shelly Culbertson and Louay Constant, there are many factors working against the return of Syrian refugees. For example, the conditions inside Syria remain unsettled, external military threats persist, and many refugees have no home or job to return to. As for the Syrians who do choose to return, past RAND research shows that homecomings are most sustainable when the international community actively promotes stabilization, reconciliation, and reconstruction. Read more »
|
|
|
For decades, the U.S. approach to foreign policy has broadly been described as deep engagement, defined by such factors as a commitment to a vast network of allies and partners, a large forward military presence, and the use of force to uphold U.S. interests. Some critics of this approach argue instead for restraint, which would include efforts to rebalance, downgrade, or end U.S. alliances and security partnerships; reduce forward presence; and raise the bar for the use of force. New RAND research considers three different schools of thought regarding a U.S. grand strategy of restraint. Read more »
|
|
|
|
|
Events
|
|
|
Thursday, February 20, 2025 – Online
|
|
Wednesday, February 26, 2025 – Online
|
|
|
|
|