JPMorgan Chase Security and Resilience Initiative - Maxthon

Executive Summary

In October 2025, JPMorgan Chase announced the Security and Resilience Initiative (SRI), a landmark $1.5 trillion, 10-year commitment to strengthening U.S. national security through strategic investments in critical industries. Led by CEO Jamie Dimon and supported by an advisory council featuring Jeff Bezos, Michael Dell, and Jim Farley, this initiative represents a paradigm shift in how private financial institutions engage with national security imperatives.

Background and Strategic Context

The Geopolitical Landscape

The initiative emerges against a backdrop of escalating strategic competition, supply chain vulnerabilities exposed by recent global disruptions, and growing concerns about technological dependence on potentially adversarial nations. Key drivers include:

Semiconductor dependencies: The U.S. reliance on foreign chip manufacturing, particularly in Taiwan and South Korea, creates strategic vulnerabilities
Rare earth mineral concentration: China’s dominance in rare earth processing (over 80% of global supply) threatens critical technology sectors
Cybersecurity threats: Increasing sophistication and frequency of state-sponsored cyber attacks on critical infrastructure
Defense industrial base erosion: Decades of outsourcing have weakened domestic manufacturing capabilities in strategic sectors

JPMorgan’s Strategic Positioning

As America’s largest bank with $3.9 trillion in assets, JPMorgan Chase occupies a unique position to mobilize capital toward national security objectives. The SRI leverages the bank’s extensive relationships across government, defense contractors, technology companies, and emerging startups to create a comprehensive ecosystem approach to national security investment.

The Advisory Council: Strategic Composition

Business Leaders

Jeff Bezos (Amazon/Blue Origin)

Brings extensive experience in cloud computing infrastructure (AWS), which underpins much of U.S. government and military operations
Blue Origin’s space capabilities align with growing recognition of space as a strategic domain
Track record of long-term thinking and willingness to invest in infrastructure with decade-long payback periods

Michael Dell (Dell Technologies)

Deep expertise in enterprise computing, edge computing, and IT infrastructure
Experience navigating complex technology supply chains and strategic acquisitions
Understanding of how to scale technology manufacturing domestically

Jim Farley (Ford Motor Company)

Firsthand experience with automotive industry’s vulnerability to chip shortages
Leadership in electric vehicle transition, relevant to energy security and reduced petroleum dependence
Practical understanding of reshoring manufacturing and building resilient supply chains

Strategic Significance

The council composition signals several strategic priorities:

Technology sovereignty: All three leaders represent sectors where U.S. technological independence is critical
Manufacturing renaissance: Combined expertise in rebuilding domestic production capabilities
Long-term orientation: Each has demonstrated willingness to make investments with extended time horizons
Government relationships: Established track records working with federal agencies and understanding regulatory environments

The $1.5 Trillion Framework

Investment Structure

Phase 1: Initial $10 Billion Commitment (Years 1-2)

Direct equity investments in strategic companies
Venture capital allocation to early-stage defense and dual-use technology startups
Focus on immediate capability gaps identified through national security assessments

Phase 2: Scaled Deployment (Years 3-5)

Expansion to $50-100 billion in active investments
Development of specialized sector funds (semiconductors, advanced materials, biotechnology, space technology)
Partnership structures with government agencies for co-investment

Phase 3: Full Ecosystem Development (Years 6-10)

Achievement of $1.5 trillion total capital mobilization through direct investment, credit facilities, and market-making activities
Establishment of self-sustaining investment platforms
Creation of secondary markets for national security-critical technologies

Target Sectors

Advanced Manufacturing

Semiconductor fabrication facilities and equipment
Additive manufacturing (3D printing) for defense applications
Advanced materials production (composites, specialized alloys)

Cybersecurity and Information Technology

Zero-trust architecture solutions
Quantum-resistant cryptography
Secure communications infrastructure

Biotechnology and Pharmaceuticals

Domestic production of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs)
Pandemic preparedness and medical countermeasures
Advanced therapeutics for battlefield medicine

Energy and Critical Minerals

Rare earth element extraction and processing
Battery technology and energy storage
Nuclear energy innovation (small modular reactors)

Aerospace and Space Technology

Satellite manufacturing and launch capabilities
Hypersonic technology development
Space situational awareness systems

Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy

AI systems for defense applications
Autonomous systems for logistics and reconnaissance
Data processing and analysis platforms

Market Outlook and Strategic Assessment

Opportunities

Market Creation and Expansion The initiative has potential to catalyze entirely new markets in national security technology. Historical precedents like DARPA’s role in creating the internet demonstrate how strategic government-aligned investment can generate transformative returns while serving national interests.

First-Mover Advantage in ESG-Adjacent Framework As environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing faces political headwinds, “national security investing” or “economic resilience investing” may emerge as an alternative framework that appeals across the political spectrum while mobilizing similar levels of capital toward long-term strategic objectives.

Demographic and Workforce Development Significant investment in advanced manufacturing and technology sectors could address workforce challenges by creating high-skilled jobs in regions affected by deindustrialization, generating both economic and political benefits.

Risks and Challenges

Political Risk and Administration Changes The 10-year timeline spans multiple election cycles. Changes in presidential administrations or congressional control could shift priorities, alter regulatory environments, or change the definition of “national security-critical” sectors.

Return on Investment Pressures JPMorgan is a publicly traded company with fiduciary duties to shareholders. The initiative must balance national security objectives with commercial viability. Technologies that are strategically important may not offer competitive financial returns, creating potential tension.

Competitor Response Other major financial institutions (Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America) may launch similar initiatives, either fragmenting the market or creating productive competition for deals. Chinese and other foreign competitors may accelerate their own strategic investment programs.

Technology Evolution Risk Investments in specific technologies may become obsolete as innovation accelerates. The initiative must maintain flexibility to pivot as the threat landscape and technological possibilities evolve.

Regulatory Complexity Operating at the intersection of national security, financial regulation, and industrial policy involves navigating multiple regulatory frameworks (SEC, CFIUS, DoD, Commerce Department). Compliance costs and bureaucratic friction could slow deployment.

Solutions and Implementation Framework

Governance Structure

Tiered Decision-Making

Strategic Level: Advisory council meets quarterly to set overall direction, identify emerging threats, and recommend sector priorities
Operational Level: Dedicated SRI management team (led by the recruited Buffett protégé) makes day-to-day investment decisions within strategic parameters
Technical Level: Sector-specific expert panels provide due diligence and technical assessment of potential investments

Government Coordination

Establishment of formal liaison relationships with Department of Defense, Department of Commerce, Department of Energy, and intelligence community
Participation in classified briefings to understand threat assessments (with appropriate personnel security clearances)
Coordination with existing programs like the Defense Production Act and CHIPS Act implementation

Investment Methodology

Dual-Use Technology Prioritization Focus on technologies with both commercial and defense applications to maximize market size and reduce dependence on government procurement alone. Examples:

AI/ML systems applicable to both commercial logistics and military supply chain optimization
Advanced encryption valuable for both corporate data protection and military communications
Drone technology for commercial delivery and military reconnaissance

Supply Chain Mapping and Vulnerability Assessment

Comprehensive analysis of critical supply chains to identify chokepoints and single-source dependencies
Geographic diversification strategies to reduce concentration risk
Investment in supply chain transparency and traceability technologies

Consortium and Partnership Models Rather than investing in isolation, create consortia that bring together:

Prime defense contractors (Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics)
Technology companies (Amazon, Microsoft, Google)
Academic research institutions
Allied nation partners (UK, Japan, Australia, South Korea)

Staged Investment with Milestones

Initial proof-of-concept funding with technical milestone gates
Scaling capital contingent on achieving production readiness
Exit strategies that ensure critical capabilities remain in trusted hands even after JPMorgan divests

Risk Mitigation Strategies

Portfolio Diversification

Spread investments across multiple technology domains to avoid over-concentration
Balance early-stage ventures (higher risk, higher potential return) with investments in established companies expanding into strategic areas
Geographic diversification within the U.S. to build resilient regional ecosystems

Technology Hedging

Make parallel investments in competing technology approaches to avoid betting on single solutions
Example: invest in both traditional lithography and alternative approaches for semiconductor manufacturing

Insurance and Guarantee Structures

Negotiate government indemnification for investments made at government request in strategically critical but commercially risky technologies
Develop specialized insurance products for supply chain disruption and strategic technology risks

Intellectual Property Protection

Rigorous due diligence on IP ownership and freedom to operate
Investment in patent portfolios that prevent foreign competitors from accessing critical technologies
Support for strengthening U.S. patent system and export control enforcement

Long-Term Solutions and Strategic Vision (2025-2035)

Building a Strategic Technology Base

Objective: Establish self-sustaining U.S. industrial capacity in all technology areas critical to national security, reducing dependence on potentially unreliable foreign sources from current levels (e.g., 80%+ dependence on Taiwan for advanced chips) to less than 30% by 2035.

Approach:

Year 1-3: Foundation Building

Map complete technology dependencies and identify critical gaps
Make anchor investments in 3-5 foundational technologies (likely semiconductors, batteries, rare earth processing, advanced materials, AI infrastructure)
Establish Centers of Excellence partnering universities with industry (model: Semiconductor Research Corporation)
Create workforce development pipeline with community colleges and vocational training

Year 4-6: Ecosystem Expansion

Scale successful initial investments from prototype to volume production
Develop secondary supplier networks to create competitive markets rather than new monopolies
Establish regional manufacturing clusters (e.g., Arizona/Texas for semiconductors, Great Lakes region for advanced materials, Southeast for aerospace)
Create specification standards that enable multiple vendors to compete

Year 7-10: Global Leadership Position

Transition from import substitution to export competitiveness
Establish U.S. as preferred supplier for allies, building coalition of democratic nations with shared technology standards
Generate returns that enable fund self-sustainability and continued reinvestment without additional capital injections
Create model that other democratic nations can replicate

Innovation Ecosystem Development

Challenge: The U.S. defense industrial base has ossified around a small number of large prime contractors. Innovation increasingly comes from commercial startups that lack access to defense markets and find the regulatory burden prohibitive.

Solution Framework:

Streamlined Defense Procurement Pathways

Work with DoD to create fast-track procurement vehicles for SRI-backed companies
Establish “innovation units” within military branches specifically chartered to work with non-traditional contractors
Create standardized security classification and facility certification programs that reduce compliance costs

Bridge Financing for “Valley of Death” The gap between prototype demonstration and production-scale deployment is where most promising defense technologies fail. SRI specifically targets this gap:

Provide patient capital for manufacturing scale-up (18-36 month timeframes)
Offer technical assistance in navigating defense acquisition process
Connect companies with potential customers in both government and commercial sectors

Dual-Use Commercialization Support Defense technologies often have civilian applications that can provide market validation and revenue to sustain the company:

Consumer electronics can incorporate advanced materials developed for aerospace
Logistics software developed for military supply chains applies to commercial shipping
Medical technologies developed for battlefield trauma care transfer to emergency medicine

Resilience and Redundancy Architecture

Multi-Supplier Strategies Historical national security procurement often created sole-source dependencies (e.g., single facility producing all submarine reactor components). SRI explicitly funds competitive alternatives:

Every critical component should have at least two independent suppliers
Geographic separation to protect against regional disasters or attacks
Technological diversity (different manufacturing approaches to same end product)

Surge Capacity Planning

Investments include maintaining excess capacity that can rapidly scale during crisis (model: Operation Warp Speed vaccine manufacturing)
Pre-positioned equipment and trained workforce that can activate quickly
Regular exercises to test surge capabilities and identify bottlenecks

Information Sharing and Threat Intelligence

Create secure information-sharing platform for portfolio companies to share threat intelligence on supply chain attacks, IP theft attempts, and cyber threats
Aggregate data to identify patterns and develop early warning systems
Provide portfolio companies with access to government threat intelligence (appropriately declassified)

Allied Nation Coordination

Challenge: U.S. cannot achieve complete self-sufficiency in all strategic technologies. Some dependencies on allied nations are acceptable and even desirable for strengthening alliances.

“Trusted Partner” Framework:

Identify democratic nations with aligned interests (Five Eyes, EU, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India)
Coordinate investment strategies to create distributed but reliable supply chains among allies
Establish mutual protection agreements for critical technologies
Create fast-track mechanisms for allied companies to access U.S. defense markets and vice versa

Technology Sharing and Co-Development

Joint ventures in cutting-edge technologies (e.g., quantum computing, hypersonics)
Shared research facilities and test ranges
Common standards and interoperability requirements
Protection against technology transfer to adversarial nations through coordinated export controls

Measuring Success: Key Performance Indicators

Strategic Metrics (2025-2035)

Supply Chain Independence

Baseline (2025): 65% dependence on potentially unreliable foreign sources for critical technologies
Target (2030): 40% dependence
Target (2035): 25% dependence

Domestic Manufacturing Capacity

Baseline (2025): ~12% of global semiconductor manufacturing in U.S.
Target (2030): 20% of global advanced chip production
Target (2035): 30% of global advanced chip production (comparable to U.S. consumption share)

Innovation Metrics

Number of patents in strategic technology areas
Number of non-traditional defense contractors successfully transitioned to production contracts
Time reduction in prototype-to-production cycle (target: 50% reduction by 2030)

Economic Impact

High-skilled manufacturing jobs created (target: 500,000+ by 2035)
Private sector capital mobilized beyond JPMorgan’s initial investment (target: 3:1 leverage ratio)
Revenue generated by portfolio companies (target: $100B+ annual revenue by 2035)

Financial Returns

Target IRR: 12-15% (above cost of capital but below pure venture capital returns, reflecting strategic mission)
Exit success rate: 60% of investments achieve successful exit or sustainability
Fund performance relative to comparable infrastructure and industrial funds

Singapore Impact Analysis

Singapore’s Strategic Position in the Initiative

Singapore occupies a unique and complex position in JPMorgan’s SRI. As a major financial hub with deep U.S. ties but also significant economic interdependence with China, Singapore represents both opportunities and challenges for the initiative.

Direct Impacts on Singapore

Financial Services Sector

Opportunities

Advisory and Structuring Services: Singapore-based JPMorgan teams could play significant roles in structuring investments, particularly for SRI activities in Southeast Asia and Indo-Pacific region
Fund Domiciliation: Singapore’s robust regulatory framework and tax treaty network makes it attractive for domiciling investment vehicles focused on regional strategic investments
Wealth Management: High-net-worth individuals in Singapore may gain access to co-investment opportunities in SRI-backed companies, creating new private banking products
Fintech Integration: Singapore’s leadership in fintech and digital banking could be leveraged for innovative investment platforms and portfolio management systems

Challenges

Geopolitical Sensitivity: Singapore must carefully balance its relationships with both U.S. and China. High-profile involvement in U.S. national security investments could complicate its neutral positioning
Regulatory Scrutiny: Monetary Authority of Singapore may need to develop new frameworks for evaluating investments with explicit national security objectives of foreign powers

Technology and Manufacturing Sector

Semiconductor Industry

Singapore hosts significant semiconductor manufacturing (GlobalFoundries, Micron, and others). SRI investments could flow to expanding these facilities or developing supply chain capabilities
Potential for Singapore to position as “trusted partner” in semiconductor supply chain resilience, particularly for mature node chips used in defense applications
Risk: Increased U.S.-China tech competition could force difficult choices if China restricts access to its market for companies participating in U.S. national security supply chains

Advanced Manufacturing

Singapore’s precision manufacturing capabilities (aerospace components, medical devices, electronics) align with SRI priorities
Could attract increased investment in dual-use technology manufacturing
Opportunity to become regional hub for testing and certification of strategic technologies

Cybersecurity

Singapore is already a regional cybersecurity hub. SRI focus on cybersecurity could drive increased investment in Singapore-based cybersecurity companies
Potential partnerships between U.S. and Singapore on cyber defense capabilities
Singapore’s Cyber Security Agency could become model for regional capacity building funded through SRI

Supply Chain and Logistics

Singapore’s position as global shipping and logistics hub creates specific opportunities:

Port and Maritime Security

Investments in maritime domain awareness and supply chain security technologies
Singapore’s port as testing ground for technologies securing global shipping from disruption
Potential for Singapore-based companies to provide services protecting critical supply chains

Regional Distribution Hub

Singapore could serve as secure warehousing and distribution center for strategic materials and components destined for allied nations in Indo-Pacific
Investments in secure logistics facilities and supply chain transparency systems
Development of “trusted partner” logistics networks that exclude potentially compromised actors

Indirect Strategic Impacts

Regional Competition and Positioning

Singapore vs. Hong Kong As Hong Kong’s autonomy erodes under Chinese control, Singapore could benefit from repositioning as the preferred Indo-Pacific financial hub for U.S. and allied strategic investments. SRI could accelerate this transition by:

Demonstrating preference for Singapore-based operations over Hong Kong
Investing in Singapore’s financial infrastructure to handle increased volumes
Building relationships with Singapore government that strengthen strategic partnership

ASEAN Leadership Singapore could leverage SRI to strengthen its position as ASEAN’s bridge to U.S. economic and security architecture:

Facilitate SRI investments in other ASEAN countries (Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines) where supply chain diversification creates opportunities
Host regional coordination mechanisms for U.S.-ASEAN economic security cooperation
Develop frameworks that allow ASEAN nations to participate in strategic technology development without compromising their non-aligned principles

Defense and Security Cooperation

Singapore maintains close defense ties with the U.S. through:

Changi Naval Base access for U.S. Navy
Air Force training facilities
Intelligence sharing relationships

SRI could deepen this cooperation:

Joint investments in maritime security technologies
Singapore as test bed for dual-use technologies in tropical/maritime environments
Expanded defense industrial cooperation, potentially including Singapore companies in U.S. defense supply chains
Training and education partnerships in strategic technologies

Challenges and Risks for Singapore

Geopolitical Tightrope

Singapore’s economy depends heavily on trade with China (its largest trading partner). Visible alignment with U.S. national security initiatives could trigger:

Chinese economic retaliation (restrictions on Singapore companies in Chinese market)
Pressure to choose sides in U.S.-China competition
Loss of Singapore’s valuable role as neutral intermediary

Strategic Mitigation:

Emphasize economic resilience and supply chain security aspects of SRI rather than explicit anti-China framing
Maintain parallel investments in economic ties with China
Frame participation in terms of Singapore’s own national interests rather than U.S. alliance
Use multilateral mechanisms (ASEAN, like-minded partners) rather than bilateral U.S.-Singapore context

Regulatory and Legal Challenges

Export Controls As U.S. tightens export controls on strategic technologies, Singapore companies and research institutions could face increased compliance burdens and restrictions on research collaboration.

Data Localization and Sovereignty SRI investments in data-intensive technologies (AI, cybersecurity) could conflict with Singapore’s data governance frameworks or create pressure for data localization requirements that fragment regional markets.

Investment Screening Singapore may need to implement more robust foreign investment screening mechanisms to prevent adversaries from accessing SRI-backed technologies through Singapore entities.

Economic Dependencies

Singapore’s small domestic market means most strategic manufacturing would be export-oriented. If global markets fragment along geopolitical lines, Singapore could face difficult choices about which markets to serve.

Singapore’s Strategic Response Framework

Balanced Engagement Strategy

Singapore should pursue a “diversified alignment” approach:

Welcome SRI investments that strengthen Singapore’s economy and technological capabilities
Maintain economic engagement with China in non-strategic sectors
Position Singapore as provider of neutral platforms and services to all parties
Invest heavily in indigenous technological capabilities that reduce dependence on any single power

Indigenous Capability Development

Rather than becoming purely dependent on U.S. or Chinese technology:

Strengthen Singapore’s own R&D in strategic areas (AI, cybersecurity, advanced materials)
Build “sovereign” capabilities in areas essential to Singapore’s own national security
Create technologies and platforms that can serve as neutral alternatives to U.S. or Chinese systems

Regional Leadership Role

Singapore is uniquely positioned to help other ASEAN nations navigate similar challenges:

Develop frameworks for participating in supply chain resilience initiatives while maintaining strategic autonomy
Create regional standards and certification systems that enable ASEAN companies to participate in global strategic technology markets
Build ASEAN-wide capabilities that give the region collective bargaining power

Financial Hub Specialization

Singapore could develop specialized capabilities in:

Structuring investments that navigate complex geopolitical and regulatory environments
Risk management for supply chain and strategic technology investments
ESG and economic resilience investment frameworks that serve as alternatives to politically polarized approaches
Neutral arbitration and dispute resolution for strategic technology partnerships

Quantitative Impact Projections for Singapore (2025-2035)

Economic Impacts

Direct Investment Inflows

Conservative estimate: $5-8 billion in SRI-related investments in Singapore-based companies and facilities over 10 years
Optimistic estimate: $15-20 billion if Singapore successfully positions as preferred Indo-Pacific hub

Job Creation

Direct: 5,000-10,000 high-skilled jobs in technology, manufacturing, and financial services
Indirect: 15,000-25,000 jobs in supporting services and industries

GDP Contribution

0.3-0.7% additional GDP growth over the decade from SRI-related activities
Larger multiplier effects if Singapore successfully attracts broader supply chain investments

Financial Services Sector Growth

Assets under management: Additional $50-100 billion in SRI-related investment funds domiciled or managed in Singapore
Advisory fees: $500 million – $1 billion in cumulative fees from structuring and advising SRI investments
New financial products: Development of economic resilience investment products could attract additional $20-50 billion in assets

Technology Sector Impacts

Semiconductor Industry

Potential $3-5 billion in additional semiconductor manufacturing investment
Strengthening of Singapore’s position in mature node and specialty semiconductor production
Development of secure chip packaging and testing capabilities

Cybersecurity

Growth of Singapore cybersecurity market from current ~$1 billion to $3-4 billion by 2035
Emergence of Singapore as preferred location for regional cybersecurity operations centers
Development of 3-5 world-class cybersecurity companies with global reach

AI and Data Analytics

Investments in secure AI development and deployment infrastructure
Positioning of Singapore as trusted location for sensitive data processing and AI model training
Growth in AI talent pool and research capabilities

Strategic Recommendations for Singapore

For Government

Develop “Economic Security” Framework: Create comprehensive national strategy for participating in global economic resilience initiatives while maintaining strategic autonomy
Strengthen Investment Screening: Implement robust CFIUS-like mechanism to prevent adversary access to strategic technologies through Singapore entities, but maintain efficiency to avoid deterring legitimate investment
Invest in Indigenous Capabilities: Double down on R&D investments in areas where Singapore needs sovereign capabilities (cybersecurity, AI, maritime technologies)
Regional Coordination: Lead ASEAN efforts to develop collective approaches to supply chain resilience and strategic technology development
Balanced Diplomacy: Maintain clear communication with both U.S. and China about Singapore’s approach, emphasizing economic resilience rather than alliance politics

For Singapore-Based Financial Institutions

Develop Expertise: Build specialized teams focused on economic resilience and strategic technology investments
Risk Management: Create frameworks for assessing and managing geopolitical risks in cross-border investments
Partnership Development: Establish relationships with JPMorgan and other Western banks pursuing similar initiatives while maintaining relationships with Chinese financial institutions
Product Innovation: Develop investment products that appeal to clients seeking exposure to economic resilience themes

For Singapore Companies

Supply Chain Transparency: Invest in systems to demonstrate supply chain security and reliability to potential U.S. customers
Dual-Use Technology Focus: Prioritize technologies with both commercial and strategic applications to maximize market opportunities
Quality and Security: Build reputation for high-quality, secure products that meet stringent U.S. and allied nation requirements
Strategic Partnerships: Form alliances with U.S. and European companies to access technical expertise and markets
Geographic Diversification: Maintain customer and supplier relationships across multiple markets to avoid over-dependence on any single region

Conclusion

JPMorgan Chase’s Security and Resilience Initiative represents an ambitious attempt to align private capital with national security imperatives on an unprecedented scale. The $1.5 trillion, 10-year commitment could fundamentally reshape U.S. industrial capabilities in strategic technologies, reduce dangerous dependencies on potentially unreliable suppliers, and create a model for how democratic nations build economic resilience in an era of great power competition.

For the initiative to succeed, it must navigate significant challenges: maintaining commercial viability while serving strategic objectives, adapting to political changes across multiple election cycles, coordinating effectively with government agencies while maintaining operational flexibility, and building sustainable competitive advantages rather than temporary subsidized capacity.

The involvement of business leaders like Bezos, Dell, and Farley brings critical expertise and credibility, but also highlights the complexity of the undertaking. Success will require not just financial capital but sustained leadership commitment, technological insight, political sophistication, and patience to see long-term investments through to fruition.

For Singapore, the SRI presents both opportunities and challenges. As a U.S. ally with significant economic ties to China, Singapore must carefully navigate increased great power competition while maintaining its valuable role as neutral intermediary and regional hub. Success will require sophisticated balancing: welcoming beneficial investments and partnerships while protecting strategic autonomy, building indigenous capabilities while remaining open to global connections, and providing leadership to ASEAN neighbors facing similar challenges.

The ultimate measure of SRI’s success will be whether, by 2035, the United States and its allies have achieved genuine economic resilience—the ability to withstand shocks, sustain critical capabilities, and maintain technological leadership without dangerous dependencies on potentially adversarial nations. If successful, the initiative could serve as a model for how democratic nations organize their economies to remain both prosperous and secure in an increasingly contested world.