National Security Presidential Memorandum/NSPM-11

6/5/2026

Presidential Memoranda

View Original

Action Summary

Purpose and Rationale: Accelerate AI adoption in the national security enterprise to enhance warfighting capabilities, protect civilians, and maintain a technical overmatch over adversaries, while overcoming bureaucratic obstacles from previous administrations.
Policy Pillars:
- Adoption: Identify mission areas for rapid AI deployment and foster proactive industry partnerships.
- Adaptation: Leverage commercial, open-source, or internally developed AI technologies optimized for specific security missions.
- Assurance: Ensure AI systems are reliable, robust, steerable, and secure with rigorous testing, contractual safeguards, and adherence to legal and policy standards.
- Accountability: Prohibit censorship, ideological bias, and unauthorized surveillance; ensure operations adhere to constitutional civil liberties.
Updated Policies and Guidance:
- Update and annual review of DOD Directive 3000.09 on Autonomy in Weapon Systems.
- Terminate or restrict contracts with vendors violating AI policy standards, with a waiver process for critical mission needs.
- Develop governance policy for AI in national security systems, including a classified annex for sensitive issues.
Advancing National Security Capabilities:
- Revise procurement processes to onboard advanced AI models from multiple vendors.
- Create a roadmap for advanced computing resource access, including commissioning secure AI facilities and a dedicated AI test range.
- Establish partnerships with the private sector to secure cutting-edge AI technologies and share threat intelligence.
Building Capacity for AI Adoption:
- Utilize special hiring authorities and talent programs to recruit technical AI experts into federal service.
- Create an AI National Security Strategic Reserve of non-governmental talent for critical support.
- Develop and implement an AI for National Security Curriculum to enhance training and literacy across agencies.
- Advance R&D for technologies that ensure AI reliability, robustness, steerability, and secure risk management.
Definitions and Terminology: Clarifies key terms including artificial intelligence, AI incident response, AI security, chain of command, and attributes such as reliability, robustness, and steerability.
General Provisions:
- This memorandum is issued under presidential authority and is subject to existing legal and budgetary constraints.
- It rescinds previous orders (e.g., National Security Memorandum-25) and does not create enforceable rights against the United States.

Risks & Considerations

The emphasis on accelerating AI adoption within the national security framework may lead to significant ethical and compliance challenges for institutions, including Vanderbilt University, as they may be expected to align their research and development efforts with government priorities.
With the focus on partnerships with the private sector, there is a risk that academic institutions could be pressured to prioritize funding and research agendas that support military applications of AI, potentially straying from educational and ethical standards.
As AI technologies become more integrated into national security, there may be heightened scrutiny and regulation of related research at universities, which could affect ongoing and future projects, particularly in sensitive fields.
Vanderbilt may need to reassess its partnerships and collaborations with federal agencies to ensure compliance with new national security directives, potentially impacting existing agreements and future opportunities.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering may need to increase its focus on AI and machine learning research, particularly as it pertains to national security applications, which could lead to new funding opportunities but also increased scrutiny.
The Peabody College of Education and Human Development might face challenges as AI’s role in education and training for national security personnel is emphasized, necessitating curriculum adjustments to meet new standards.
Research initiatives developed through Vanderbilt’s Center for Technology and Human Development may need to pivot to align with national security goals, potentially affecting the direction and funding of projects.
Vanderbilt’s Law School could see an increased demand for legal expertise related to AI ethics and regulation in national security, offering opportunities for new courses or research initiatives.

Financial Impact

The push for rapid AI adoption may lead to a shift in funding sources, with potential decreases in traditional grants as federal funds become more focused on specific national security-related initiatives.
Vanderbilt could benefit from new funding opportunities related to defense contracts, but it may require realignment of resources and priorities to effectively compete for these funds.
There may be implications for tuition and enrollment as the university navigates the impact of AI on job markets and student interest in national security careers, potentially altering financial aid requirements.
The university’s investment in AI research may increase operational costs, necessitating careful budget management to balance new initiatives with existing commitments.

Relevance Score: 4 (The memorandum presents a need for potential major changes or transformations of programs and compliance structures.)

Key Actions

The Office of Federal Relations should actively engage with federal agencies and industry partners to stay informed about the new AI policies and their implications for national security. This will ensure that Vanderbilt is aligned with federal initiatives and can adapt its research and programs accordingly.
Vanderbilt’s School of Engineering should enhance its research capabilities in AI technologies relevant to national security applications. By collaborating with national security agencies, the school can contribute to developing AI solutions that meet the evolving needs of the national security enterprise.
The Department of Computer Science should initiate training programs focused on AI ethics and governance. This will prepare graduates to address the legal and ethical implications of AI in national security and foster responsible innovation in AI technologies.
Vanderbilt’s Center for Cybersecurity should focus on developing strategies to safeguard AI systems against adversarial attacks and ensure compliance with the new national AI security standards. This will enhance the university’s reputation as a leader in AI security research.
The Office of Research should facilitate partnerships with private sector companies involved in AI technology development. Engaging with these companies will allow Vanderbilt to secure access to cutting-edge technologies and contribute to advancements in AI applications for national security.

Opportunities

The executive memorandum provides an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s School of Public Policy to analyze and advocate for policies that promote ethical AI usage in national security, potentially influencing future legislation.
By investing in AI-focused research, Vanderbilt can position itself as a key player in the growing field of AI applications in defense and security, attracting funding and partnerships.
The emphasis on collaboration with academia presents a chance for Vanderbilt to host workshops and conferences that discuss AI innovations and their implications for national security, elevating the university’s profile in this critical area.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order necessitates major process changes to align Vanderbilt’s research and programs with national security priorities and AI developments.)

Average Relevance Score: 4.6

Timeline for Implementation

Within 30 days of a waiver being granted – Heads of agencies must report the waiver in writing within 30 days of its grant (Section 3(b)).
Within 90 days of the memorandum – Several actions including updating DOD Directive 3000.09 (Section 3(a)), issuing governance policy for AI in national security systems (Section 3(c)), and releasing a classified annex (Section 3(d)).
Within 120 days of the memorandum – Multiple directives such as reviewing and updating procurement processes (Section 4(a)), developing partnerships and joint AI data/model exchanges (Sections 4(c) and 4(f)), establishing an AI National Security Strategic Reserve (Section 5(b)), implementing an AI for National Security Curriculum (Section 5(c)), along with initiatives for AI risk management and standardized testing protocols (Sections 5(e) and 5(f)).

Relevance Score: 5

Impacted Government Organizations

Department of State: Represented by the Secretary of State, this department is responsible for diplomatic and international policy matters affected by the order.
Department of the Treasury: The Secretary of the Treasury is directed to participate, impacting financial oversight and contract-related matters.
Department of War: Led by the Secretary of War, this department (historically analogous to the Department of Defense) is central to the military applications and doctrine updates outlined.
Department of Justice: The Attorney General is included, tying in legal and oversight functions regarding the use and deployment of AI.
Department of Energy: The Secretary of Energy is assigned roles related to advancing AI applications in national security contexts.
Department of Homeland Security: With the Secretary of Homeland Security as a key recipient, this agency is mandated to integrate AI into its operations for enhanced security.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB): The OMB Director is tasked with coordinating policies on AI governance and streamlining acquisition processes.
Director of National Intelligence (DNI): The DNI is charged with overseeing AI integration within intelligence operations and collaborating with other national security agencies.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA): As a principal intelligence organization, the CIA is implicated in implementing directives related to AI adoption and counter-threat measures.
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs: This office will play a strategic role in ensuring that AI advancements conform with national security priorities.
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology: Tasked with facilitating collaboration with industry and academia to secure technical AI capabilities.
Assistant to the President for Policy and Homeland Security Advisor: This role supports the development and oversight of policies ensuring AI systems adhere to national security standards.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI): The Director of the FBI is included, reflecting the need for law enforcement to monitor and secure AI-related processes.
Office of Personnel Management (OPM): The OPM Director is involved in recruiting AI technical talent to support federal initiatives.
Office of the National Cyber Director: This office is charged with ensuring cybersecurity measures are integrated into AI technology deployments.
Committee on National Security Systems: This committee is referenced for issuing governance policies related to the use of AI in national security systems.
National Security Agency (NSA): Represented by its Director, the NSA is involved in developing and managing secure AI systems and testing methodologies.

Relevance Score: 5 (A broad directive affecting more than 16 government agencies across national security, intelligence, and administrative domains.)

Responsible Officials

Secretary of State – Receives memorandum directives and coordinates on strategy with respect to foreign AI technology analysis and allied engagement.
Secretary of the Treasury – Included in the memorandum’s initial list to oversee policy and financial implications for national security AI initiatives.
Secretary of War – Tasked with issuing an update to DOD Directive 3000.09 on Autonomy in Weapon Systems, reviewing procurement processes, and coordinating multiple AI-related initiatives.
Attorney General – Listed as one of the primary recipients; oversees legal and civil liberties aspects related to AI usage in the national security enterprise.
Secretary of Energy – Involved in developing capabilities for AI applications in national security, collaborating on procurement and joint strategy for AI risk management.
Secretary of Homeland Security – Coordinated with other officials to leverage talent programs and support AI national security efforts.
Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director) – Charged with issuing guidance for AI governance and coordinating on a roadmap for advanced computing resources and employment of AI systems.
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) – Instructed to coordinate on AI system procurement, foreign AI technology analysis, curriculum development, and risk management strategies.
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – Named among the recipients, accountable for integrating AI into intelligence functions under the broader national security framework.
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA) – Receives reports regarding waivers on contractor exceptions and guidance to ensure consistent national security practices.
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST) – Involved in policy formulation for AI governance in national security systems and in coordinating technical talent and AI curriculum initiatives.
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI Director) – Listed among the responsible officials, ensuring that AI deployment aligns with law enforcement and civil liberties protections.
Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM Director) – Tasked with utilizing special hiring and pay authorities to accelerate recruiting technical AI talent and establishing an AI National Security Strategic Reserve.
National Cyber Director – Receives oversight input through the review of standardized test and evaluation methodologies for AI systems.
Director of the National Security Agency (NSA Director) – Plays a central role in developing AI computing roadmaps, establishing partnerships with private-sector companies, and submitting standardized AI test and evaluation methodologies.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect agency heads, Cabinet-level officials, and high-level advisors integral to national security policy and execution.)