By Gayle Trotter
Early Monday, as the day was just beginning in America, a Chinese nuclear submarine emerged in the Pacific Ocean and launched a ballistic missile topped with a dummy warhead. This marked China’s first test of its kind since 2024, causing Japan to hastily respond to track the falling debris. Meanwhile, Australia and New Zealand expressed formal objections. The act served as a clear signal aimed at an American audience still considering if the threat posed by China is tangible.
Indeed, the threat is genuine and has long been brewing.
Just days prior, the Pentagon released its annual analysis of the People’s Liberation Army, highlighting concerns likely to be overlooked by many in Washington: China is on track to deploy nine aircraft carriers by 2035, its nuclear weapon count is expected to surpass 1,000 by 2030, and Xi Jinping has instructed his forces to prepare for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027. The report also uncovered a distressing domestic threat for Americans — the Volt Typhoon cyber incursions, which infiltrated U.S. critical infrastructure to potentially disrupt power, water, and pipelines during a crisis.
Furthermore, recent reports reveal that Chinese experts have been instructing Russian troops in the use of radiological, biological, and chemical warfare tactics amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. This indicates a strong Beijing-Moscow alliance, sharing practical war strategies amidst the most significant land conflict in Europe since 1945.
When I served as an official with the Trump administration, I saw the aftermath of threats that metastasize when warning signs sat too long without a real response. Beijing is moving on every front — military, cyber, industrial — and Congress is right to want tools that match that scale. The AI competition is no exception: whoever’s technology the world builds on will hold the advantage for a generation. That’s precisely why it matters that the tools we pass actually work.