---------- https://thymia.ai/ 134 Council of Europe (2021). Common Human Rights Challenges Raised by Neurotechnologies in the Biomedical Field. 135 Carrillo-Reid, L., Han, S., Yang, W., Akrouh, A., & Yuste, R. (2019). Controlling visually guided behavior by holographic recalling of cortical ensembles. Cell, 178(2), 447-457. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867419306166 136 Council of Europe (2021). Common Human Rights Challenges Raised by Neurotechnologies in the Biomedical Field Stampacchia, S., et al. (2022). Fingerprinting of brain disease: Connectome identifiability in cognitive decline and neurodegeneration. bioRxiv. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.04.479112v1.abstract & Finn, E. S., et al. (2015). Functional connectome fingerprinting: identifying individuals using patterns of brain connectivity. Nature neuroscience, 18(11), 1664-1671. https://www.nature.com/articles/nn.4135! 141 IBM (2021). Privacy And The Connected Mind. https://fpf.org/blog/how-neurotechnology-can-benefit- society-while-leading-with-privacy-and-ethics/ There are exceptions in the instance of anonymised data and considerations around pseudonymised data. In these cases, whether data are classed as personal depends on the likelihood of reidentification. For further information see ICO (2022). Draft Anonymisation, Pseudonymisation and Privacy Enhancing Technologies guidance. Chapter 3: Pseudonymisation. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/ico-and- stakeholder-consultations/ico-call-for-views-anonymisation-pseudonymisation-and-privacy-enhancing- technologies-guidance/ 147 ICO. Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). https://ico.org.uk/for- organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/key- definitions/what-is-personal-data/ 148 Rainey, S., McGillivray, K., Akintoye, S., Fothergill, T., Bublitz, C., & Stahl, B. (2020). Is the European Data Protection Regulation sufficient to deal with emerging data concerns relating to neurotechnology? Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7(1), lsaa051. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa051. 149 IBM (2021). Privacy and the Connected Mind. 150 This is on top of the lawful basis for processing captured in Article 6. Moreover, five of the conditions captured in Article 9 of the GDPR also require meeting additional conditions set out in the Data Protection Act (2018). 151 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation). https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eur/2016/679 152 Data Protection Act 2018. Schedule 1. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/12/schedule/1/enacted Council of Europe (2021). Common Human Rights Challenges Raised by Neurotechnologies in the Biomedical Field. 156 Discussion of mental autonomy and integrity is distinct from debates around free will, a concept about which many neuroscientists are sceptical. Mental integrity is best understood as supporting agency i.e. the ability to act on the basis of one’s own thoughts and reasoning. 157 Council of Europe (2021). Common Human Rights Challenges Raised by Neurotechnologies in the Biomedical Field. 158 Carrillo-Reid, L., Han, S., Yang, W., Akrouh, A., & Yuste, R. (2019). Controlling visually guided behavior by holographic recalling of cortical ensembles. Cell, 178(2), 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.045 159 Fernández, E., et al. (2021). Visual percepts evoked with an intracortical 96-channel microelectrode array inserted in human occipital cortex. The Journal of clinical investigation, 131(23). https://www.jci.org/articles/view/151331 160 Shelchkova, N. D., et al. (2022). Microstimulation of human somatosensory cortex evokes task- dependent, spatially patterned responses in motor cortex. bioRxiv. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.08.10.503543v1#:~:text=Intracortical%20microstimulation% 20(ICMS)%20of%20somatosensory,via%20brain%20controlled%20bionic%20hands. 161 Sitaram, R., Ros, T., Stoeckel, L. et al. (2017). Closed-loop brain training: the science of neurofeedback. Nat Rev Neurosci 18, 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.164 ----- Norori, N., Hu, Q., Aellen, F. M., Faraci, F. D., & Tzovara, A. (2021). Addressing bias in big data and AI for health care: A call for open science. Patterns, 2(10), 100347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100347 167 Nonetheless, automated decision-making may be allowed when the decision is necessary for a contract, it is authorised by law or it is based on the individual’s explicit consent. For further information, see: ICO. Automated decision-making and profiling. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data- protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/automated-decision-making-and-profiling/ 168 ICO. Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). Rights related to automated decision-making including profiling. https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to- the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/individual-rights/rights-related-to-automated-decision-making- including-profiling/ 169 Anita van Mil et al. (2019) From our brain to the world: views on the future of neural interfaces. Hopkins Van Mil. https://royalsociety.org/-/media/policy/projects/ihuman/public-engagement-full-report.pdf?la=en- GB&hash=5B6417E1881961853318F4CD570CA07A Eliza Strickland & Mark Harris (2022). Their Bionic Eyes Are Now Obsolete and Unsupported. IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/bionic-eye-obsolete 172 MHRA (2021) Consultation on the future regulation of medical devices in the United Kingdom. Chapter 8, Section 48. 173 UNESCO (2022). Chile: Pioneering the protection of neurorights. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/chile- pioneering-protection-neurorights & Senado Republica de Chile (2021). Protección de los neuroderechos: inédita legislación va a la Sala. https://www.senado.cl/proteccion-de-los-neuroderechos-a-un-paso-de- pasar-a-segundo-tramite ------ https://www.czdefence.com/article/how-will-neurotechnology-transform-the-military-sector#:~:text=Initial%20efforts%20to%20establish%20legal%20and%20ethical,in%20the%20first%20global%20neuroprotection%20this%20year. How will neurotechnology transform the military sector? 26. 01. 2025 category: Topic facebook sharing button twitter sharing button sharethis sharing button linkedin sharing button reddit sharing button whatsapp sharing button messenger sharing button email sharing button Neurotechnologies, particularly brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), have the potential to rewrite the rules of warfare and global security. Let's take a look together at how neurotechnologies will transform the military sector. a study published in 2022 by the prestigious Cambridge University Press, which analyses possible scenarios for the commercial and military deployment of neurotechnology in the US and China, is certainly worthy of attention. The authors of the study, Margaret Kosal and Joy Putney of the Georgia Institute of Technology, provide a detailed assessment of the geopolitical, ethical and technological aspects associated with the development of this breakthrough technology. What does this study highlight most? 1. Geopolitical competition between the US and China The study identifies the US and China as major players in military neurotechnology. The United States benefits from a technological lead, large-scale investment and the innovative approach of start-ups and universities. China, on the other hand, benefits from centralised management of research and rapid deployment of innovations into practice. Its society is more willing to adopt new technologies, which can accelerate their implementation. 2. Potential arms race The race to develop neurotechnologies could significantly affect the global balance of power. Neurotechnologies such as BCI could offer military advantages such as faster decision-making, more effective coordination, and greater soldier resilience. The authors warn that a lack of regulation could lead to the misuse of these technologies and escalate tensions between major powers. 3. Ethical and legal challenges The study highlights the need for international legal and ethical frameworks. Without such regulations, neurotechnologies could undermine fundamental human rights, including individual autonomy. Regulations should prevent the use of these technologies to manipulate, monitor or suppress civil liberties. What applications are waiting for us? Although this study does not elaborate much on specific applications, based on my broader research in the field of neurotechnology, I will outline some scenarios and visions of what such an application of neurotechnology in the military sector could look like. At the moment, these are rather speculative visions, which may, however, take on realistic contours over time. 1. Rehabilitation and reintegration of wounded soldiers (expected deployment: 3-5 years) Neuroprostheses and nervous system stimulation are already at an advanced stage of development. Wounded soldiers could regain motor skills or better manage post-traumatic stress thanks to neurotechnologies. This technology could find applications within a few years. ---------- 2. Monitoring of physical and psychological condition (expected deployment: up to 7-10 years) One of the most likely apps to revolutionize soldier health monitoring. While it is already possible to monitor basic parameters such as heart rate, adrenaline levels or fatigue using wearable devices, neurotechnology will allow a much deeper view of a soldier's condition, including monitoring neurophysical signals such as brain activity. The technology will be able to measure not only physical condition, but also emotional and psychological responses, such as reactions to stress or anxiety, in real time. Examples: Advanced psychological monitoring: neurotechnology will provide data on how the soldier reacts to challenging situations, how he copes with psychological stress and how his brain adapts to changes in the environment. Interactive responses: based on these signals, it will be possible to implement automatic stimulation techniques to maintain concentration or calm down, which is not possible with traditional technologies. This combination of physical and psychological monitoring in real time will allow commanders to better plan and adapt combat operations, reducing the risk of exhaustion or psychological problems for troops. 3. Unmanned operations (expected deployment: within 10-15 years) Thanks to neurotechnology, soldiers will be able to control drones and robots with thoughts alone. This technology will not only make operations, but it will also bring entirely new capabilities that current controls via controllers or keyboards do not offer. Examples: Speed of response: thoughts bypass the lengthy process of physically entering commands. Control can be almost instantaneous, which can be crucial in crisis situations, for example when averting an unexpected attack. Linking to autonomous functions: neurotechnology could also enable advanced autonomous functions, where machines respond to the soldier's intent without the need to specify individual steps in detail. For example, a drone could evaluate the thought instruction "explore the area" and autonomously determine the optimal route. 4. Simulation and training (expected deployment : up to 15-20 years) Neurotechnology could replace physical training polygons with realistic simulations of combat situations directly in the mind. Soldiers could thus train crisis response in a safe environment at minimal cost. Examples: Neurotechnology-driven virtual reality: realistic simulations of combat situations where the soldier experiences a crisis "in his mind", which improves stress responses. Based on neurotechnology data, training can be personalized according to the weaknesses and strengths of individual soldiers. Cost Reduction: Significant financial reduction by replacing physical polygons with virtual ones. 5. Increasing cognitive abilities of soldiers (expected deployment: up to 15-25 years) Future neurotechnologies may turn soldiers into "superthinking machines" that can analyse complex situations in fractions of a second. Examples: Accelerated decision-making: soldiers equipped with neurotechnology will be able to process data from drones, satellites and sensors in real time. For example, during combat, they can instantly identify enemy threats and design optimal tactics. Mind projection: instead of physical displays, the implants will allow soldiers to see digital maps, instructions or battle orders right in front of their eyes - or rather, in their minds. Emotion and stress detection: using neurotechnology, stress, fear or fatigue levels could be monitored in real time. The technology could automatically modulate brain activity and ensure that the soldier remains calm and fully focused even in crisis situations. 6. Mental influence on opponents (expected deployment: up to 20-30 years) One of the most controversial and remote options. Purely theoretically, neurotechnology could be used to manipulate the emotions, moods or decision-making of adversaries. For example, electromagnetic stimulation could be used to lower an enemy's morale or influence their strategy. Examples: Affecting mood: precisely targeted electromagnetic waves could manipulate areas of the brain responsible for emotions, such as the amygdala. This could induce feelings of fear, panic or, conversely, apathy, thereby significantly reducing the combat effectiveness of enemy troops. Virtual projection: the use of neurotechnology could allow the manipulation of enemy perceptions. Imagine, for example, sending images, sounds, or even smells directly into an adversary's brain, which could lead to the perception that he is in danger or that his mission is unfeasible. Disinformation: precisely targeted manipulation of memory or decision centers in the brain could confuse the enemy, for example, so that he misinterprets orders, forgets key details, or makes a mistake in strategy. It is important to stress here that this particular scenario is highly speculative, but its fulfilment would nevertheless mark a radical shift in the approach not only to psychological operations. Ethical issues and risks Neurotechnologies bring many positive changes, but also significant ethical challenges. In the future, they may erode human autonomy or be used for manipulation and oppression. It is therefore crucial to develop robust legal and ethical frameworks to ensure that these technologies are not misused. Once neurotechnologies begin to be deployed on a mass scale, their implementation will need to be carefully monitored to ensure that they comply with international standards and legal principles. Initial efforts to establish legal and ethical frameworks are already underway. For example, the scientific section of UNESCO is now working on a muster that should result in the first global neuroprotection this year. Neuroprince is a field that bridges neuroscience and law and is concerned with protecting the rights of individuals from the misuse of neurotechnologies. It aims to ensure the ethical and responsible use of technologies that interact with the human brain and nervous system. ------------ https://www.darpa.mil/research/ideas Before an idea becomes a program, it gets mulled, kicked around, and questioned. During this period of contemplation, our program managers talk – a lot – to experts, potential transition partners, and each other. But we often wonder: What information are we missing that would provide much-needed context for program development? Researchers, end users, and other stakeholders are encouraged to read through our Ideas Under Incubation. If inspired, share your thoughts. *See important disclaimers and notes Information Innovation Office (I2O) AI FORGE: Fostering Research and Growth in Emerging Artificial Intelligence In partnership with the U.S. National Science Foundation, AI FORGE aims to establish an industry/university/government consortium on AI research focused on solving AI critical challenges for national security. The goal is to accelerate adoption by industry and federal agencies. | Contact Program Manager Matthew Marge Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) Cryogenic cooling for future computation What practical and affordable cryogenic refrigeration approaches and techniques are possible to realize potential future computational approaches? What alternatives can be considered? | Contact Program Manager Yogendra Joshi Energy storage to replace batteries How would you conceive of, and domestically produce, stored energy sources with the same or better performance of today’s batteries while avoiding the constraints of current form factors and materials through malleability; conformability; tailorable size, shape, capacity, and/or endurance? | Contact Program Manager Thomas Schratwieser Enhanced Microsystems What are the challenges, potentially new approaches, and anticipated impacts of chemical and biological interactions with microsystems so that microsystems not only survive chemically and biologically harsh treatments but are enhanced by them? | Contact Program Manager Huanan Zhang Increase Complexity of Inorganic Materials What are the materials, properties, processes, and controls necessary to create new inorganic materials with precise composition and structural accuracy to support the development of advanced microsystems? | Contact Program Manager Huanan Zhang Inverse design methodology What are the inverse design approaches and algorithms that can be used to overcome the sequential design process for conventional microelectronics system integration, which generally precludes optimization across all packaging levels? | Contact Program Manager David Meyer Living microsystems for computing, sensing, and control Recent demos of fungal mycelia interfacing with robots open possibilities for living microsystems over conventional computing for control, communications, and sensing. What are fungi’s limits as control elements? Are interfaces a barrier? Can fungi be trained, grown, and propagated? | Contact Program Manager Julian McMorrow Low-loss high permeability and permittivity materials Are there novel materials with high permeability and high permittivity that allow dynamic control to radically change the capability of traditional capacitors, transformers, circuit substrates, electrically small antennas, and other components? | Contact Program Manager Jonathan Hoffman Low-SWaP, high bandwidth HF-UHF antennas/receivers As lower frequency electromagnetic waves typically require large antennas and receive systems, are there novel quantum, photonic, or even classical approaches that can dramatically reduce the size, weight, and power (SWAP) and improve sensitivity over the current state of the art? | Contact Program Manager Jonathan Hoffman Lunar Manufacturing Infrastructure, Energy Generation and Storage A lunar economy will require in-situ resource utilization of lunar-abundant materials. What are the challenges and opportunities in isolating and purifying critical elements from regolith? Can these technologies scale for manufacture? Which energy solutions best suit a lunar environment? | Contact Program Manager Julian McMorrow Medical Microsystems How could internal treatment be administered (such as stopping internal bleeding) without surgery through focused, non-invasive energy delivery with microsystems assisting biological processes? | Contact Program Manager Huanan Zhang Microelectronics advanced packaging What approaches can be applied to overcome the three-dimensional integrated circuit multi-physics design challenges that consider the co-design of electrical, thermal, and mechanical properties while reducing volume and increasing packing density? | Contact Program Manager David Meyer Microelectronics black start Which technologies enable, or challenges hinder, the rapid black-start reconstitution of a new microelectronics manufacturing capability? Can existing supplies be repurposed while capacity is built? Can a clean-slate capability replace traditional with unconventional microsystems? | Contact Program Manager Julian McMorrow Multi-material class integration for microelectronics What are the novel ways to exploit opportunities and overcome challenges when additively integrating disparate material classes and materials with diverse deposition and compliance requirements, yet still maintaining flexibility with close proximity 3D placement? | Contact Program Manager David Meyer Quantum and photonic backend processing Can quantum and integrated photonic technologies dramatically change sensor backend or receiver designs by replacing analog to digital converters, enabling analog processing, improving tunability, and other functions? | Contact Program Manager Jonathan Hoffman Quantum Manufacturing What tools, equipment, processes, and accompanying figures of merit are needed to enable domestic manufacturing of fieldable quantum sensors at scale and address integration and parallelization challenges across heterogeneous and homogeneous systems? | Contact Program Manager Jonathan Hoffman Sequence defined polymer synthesis with molecular machines for microsystems applications What approaches, platforms, and systems could enable synthesis of sequence-defined polymers (e.g., novel synthetic methods and/or molecular machines)? What DoW applications might such macromolecules unlock for catalysts, optical materials, textiles, and microsystems manufacturing? | Contact Program Manager John M. Hoffman Very large-scale photonic integrated circuits (VLPI) What are the automated design tools, co-designed natively-optical algorithms and architectures that can produce future VLPI circuits? How can these platforms achieve revolutionary new commercial and military capabilities that surpass what can be done by current electronic-based platforms? | Contact Program Manager Anna Tauke-Pedretti Disclaimers ------------ https://ifc.usafa.edu/articles/institute-of-future-conflict-2026-threat-horizon-report Institute of Future Conflict 2026 Threat Horizon Report The only thing as important as winning the last war is winning the next one. At the Institute of Future Conflict, we focus on understanding oncoming threats, identifying solutions for them, and ensuring our future leaders will conquer them. As our motto states, Omnes Somniant Sed Non Aequales—all men dream, but not equally. The few that dream and predict with precision become the strategists who shape tomorrow’s battlefields. In our inaugural Threat Horizon report, we asked our military fellows the following question: what is the most pressing issue facing the national security community over the 2026 fiscal year? Our Fellows are specialists drawn from across the Air and Space Forces. They are mentored by academics, industry experts, and retired senior leaders. In this report, they responded with topics covering silicon to soldiers, from Ukraine’s trenches to the high heavens of space. Most importantly, we promise our audience follow-through. In one year’s time for our second Threat Horizon report, not only will we provide a look at what’s coming in 2027, but we will also assess how our 2026 predictions fared and reflect on what reality offered instead. We will be wrong about some threats, right about others, and ready for both. ‍ ‍ Major R. Jake Alleman IFC Fellow, Class of 2025 Cyberspace Operations Officer, USSF Precision at Scale: The Industrialization of Influence Operations The war against American minds will open a new front in 2025. The convergence of China’s massive personal data collection efforts with AI capabilities will create an unprecedented national security threat in the next year: automated social engineering at scale. Countering this threat requires an extensive overhaul of defensive training for US government personnel to recognize and react to industrialized influence operations. China is responsible for some of the most significant data breaches in history. In 2014, they breached Office of Personnel Management networks and stole personnel files of 4.2 million active and former government employees and security clearance information on 21.5 million people. As part of their digital dragnet efforts, Chinese hackers infiltrated every major US telecom operation and siphoned off data for years, theoretically collecting data on every American with a cell phone. They have our personnel files. They have our communications. But they’re also harvesting our digital footprints to complete the picture. TikTok is the most widely used PRC-based data collection tool, building profiles on its 1.59 billion global users (roughly 135.79 million from the US) from “information that [the users] provide, information from other sources, and automatically collected information.” The PRC-based AI company DeepSeek has an estimated 125 million global users, with an enormous market inside the US. Since Chinese law requires companies to provide their data to the government on request, the CCP likely has access to all commercial data as well. This data collection has been ongoing for years. What has changed is AI’s ability to perform social engineering—cyberattacks using psychological manipulation to trick or coerce people into giving up sensitive information or performing actions that compromise security. Historically, social engineering meant choosing between scale (Nigerian Prince emails) or precision (targeted CEO fraud). AI now chooses both. Personal data has become precision munitions. The result transforms social engineering from an art into an assembly line. Once trained, an AI agent can engage on this new front en masse 24/7, 365, learning from its failures and iterating to find the most successful tactics for any category of target at silicon speeds. Personal information uploaded to Chinese apps, old security clearance questionnaires, text messages between family members—imagine an attack that can leverage all of this. Determining what’s real from what’s fake becomes unlikely, if not impossible. Current DoD security theater does not inspire confidence. A one-hour cyber refresher course with minimal social engineering coverage was already insufficient. In this new environment, it will be like trying to stem a flood with a sieve when we need seawalls. To protect their people—and the security interests they represent—US government agencies need to prioritize anti-social engineering training. The PRC has gathered human intelligence through breaches. They’ve collected signals intelligence through telecom infiltration. Now they’re poised to weaponize artificial intelligence to turn our own data against us. The war against American minds is about to go industrial, and we’re still drilling with wooden shields. Major Joseph “Paveway” Bledsoe IFC Fellow, Class of 2025 F-15E Fighter Pilot, USAF The Airpower Paradox: Enforcing a Ukrainian Peace The most significant national security challenge for the coming fiscal year will not be a new conflict, but the fragile task of enforcing a potential ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. Should hostilities pause, the international community will demand a robust enforcement mechanism. In this context, US and NATO airpower will be presented as the primary tool—a seemingly clean, decisive, and standoff solution. However, this reliance on airpower alone is a strategic trap, creating a paradox where the very instrument of enforcement could become the catalyst for a wider war. An air-centric enforcement strategy would likely involve establishing a No-Fly Zone (NFZ) over designated Ukrainian territories, enforced by NATO combat air patrols operating from allied bases. The mission would be to deter or destroy any Russian military assets violating the terms of the agreement. On the surface, this plays to overwhelming Western strengths, leveraging superior western platforms to dominate the airspace and provide persistent surveillance. The problem with this strategy lacks ground-level credibility and possesses an extremely high potential for miscalculation. An NFZ is not a passive shield; it is an act of continuous aerial combat. Every Russian sortie near the line of demarcation, every surface-to-air missile system activation, and every drone flight would become a tactical decision with strategic, even nuclear, implications. Who determines hostile intent? What are the rules of engagement when a Russian aircraft is escorting a “humanitarian” convoy? A single shoot-down, whether accidental or deliberate, could collapse the peace and trigger a direct NATO-Russia conflict—the very outcome many have spent years trying to avoid. Furthermore, airpower alone cannot verify complex ceasefire terms, such as the withdrawal of specific ground forces or the disarmament of militias. It cannot build trust or separate intertwined populations. This creates a hollow enforcement shell where violations can occur under the cloud cover of a radar screen, breeding resentment and inevitably leading to a resumption of conflict. The central challenge for the next year, therefore, will be resisting the alluringly simple solution of applied airpower and instead focusing on the messy, difficult, but ultimately more stable work of building a peace that doesn't solely depend on a pilot’s trigger finger at 30,000 feet. Major Jacob Draszkiewicz IFC Fellow, Class of 2026 C-17A Pilot, USAF A New Era of Air Defense: America’s Golden Dome and the European Sky Shield Initiative In recent years, we have seen a proliferation of drone warfare on the battlefields of Ukraine and in the Israel-Hamas war. The US homeland has also become subject to drone incursions. This year, the congressional Subcommittee on Military and Foreign Affairs found that in 2024 there were over 350 drone incursions at 100 different military installations. Most recently, in September, NATO countries Poland and Romania also reported drone incursions, with 19 Russian drones entering Poland’s airspace, prompting Warsaw to invoke NATO’s Article 4, requiring emergency consultations. The increased use of low-cost drones is quickly becoming a preferred tool in hybrid warfare. Not only can drones be used to deliver low-cost kinetic strikes, but they are also effective in surveillance and information gathering, disrupting civilian infrastructure, and inciting public fear and political tension. Moving forward, low-cost hybrid drone warfare, complemented by advancements in artificial intelligence, poses a real and immediate challenge to air defense in the US and our European allies. This has sparked a renewed effort to review current air defense system capabilities and modernization efforts to effectively and efficiently counter drones and other threats. America’s Golden Dome Earlier this year, President Trump issued Executive Order 14186 stating, “The threat of attack by ballistic, hypersonic, and cruise missiles, and other advanced aerial attacks, remains the most catastrophic threat facing the United States.” Although drones are not explicitly mentioned, the broader message regarding increased aerial and space-based threats from next-generation strategic weapons underscores the urgent need to overhaul our existing missile defense capabilities with a next-generation missile defense shield. Specific details regarding the Golden Dome initiative are limited, but the Congressional Budget Office estimates the cost to be between $161 billion and $542 billion. America’s Golden Dome initiative could become our generation’s Manhattan Project and demand an unprecedented collective effort by US private defense contractors to develop new technologies and capabilities. The Golden Dome initiative should focus on all domains and threat levels, including counter-drone capabilities. We should use this opportunity to design multi-layered defense architecture that includes modernizing our small unmanned aerial system (sUAS) and drone defense capabilities. European Sky Shield Initiative Since its inception in 2022, the European Sky Shield Initiative (ESSI) has aimed to bolster NATO’s integrated air and missile defense capabilities. Originally led by Germany, the initiative now includes over 20 NATO members, including Poland. The ESSI has quickly become NATO’s collective effort to reinforce and modernize Europe’s air defense. Although this effort is a step in the right direction, the ESSI remains more of a concept than a reality. Germany has made the most progress with its US-approved $3.5 billion deal to purchase Israel’s advanced Arrow 3 missile defense system. Signed in 2023, the deal is the largest defense sale for Israel and provides Germany with a battle-tested air defense system that has showcased its effectiveness in Israel’s robust Iron Dome and in countering Iranian ballistic missiles. However, the Arrow 3 system is less effective against low-flying projectiles like drones and will likely take several years before it is fully operational and integrated into Germany’s air defense. Additionally, Germany and Poland’s current layered air defense systems rely heavily on the US Patriot system, which is neither the most cost-efficient nor practical for countering drones. Hybrid drone warfare poses a significant challenge to US national security both at home and abroad. Modernizing air defense systems that are cost-effective and efficient is critical to countering the evolving threats posed by hybrid drone warfare. The Golden Dome and ESSI initiatives provide the guiding frameworks to address these challenges and maintain a strategic defensive posture at all levels. Lt Col Melissa “Sharpie” McLain IFC Fellow, Class of 2023 Intelligence Officer, USAF Cognitive Combat Training Foreign Malign Influence (FMI) and propaganda are not new forms of warfare. What has changed since the mid-to-late 2000s is the technology available to broadcast these messages; the amount of time users spend captivated by these technologies; and the surgical precision to curate the messages to trigger the audiences’ emotions across multiple mediums in the attention economy. Cognitive manipulation is the next 'big threat' to our way of life and National Security. Adversaries leverage these new technologies and platforms at a speed, scale, and an incredibly affordable price-point to export their mass media manipulation tradecraft to US citizens. These narratives exploit openness in the US democratic system, Americans’ way of living, and the freedoms provided by the US Constitution. Adversaries masterfully craft emotionally charged social media content, driving wedges, sowing chaos and confusion on critical issues. For example, leading up to the Foreign Aid Package approval in April 2024, Russian actors flooded the media with carefully curated content to polarize decision makers and American support. These narratives ranged from comparing US involvement in Ukraine to Vietnam and Afghanistan, while at the same time creating media to amplify the border crisis within the US. These narratives trigger strong emotions like shame and anger, dampening senior decision makers’ initiative to reframe the narrative, while stoking concern amongst citizens of all generations. At the same time, Russian actors amplified border crisis incidents with partially fabricated video content showing increased crime rates as well as food and job shortages. The border crisis narrative stoked chaos within the population, driving citizens into a feeling of scarcity, which triggered survival responses and fueled a distrust in governmental decisions. The change in technology now affords the adversary the ability to incessantly target and shape the subconscious thoughts of individual US citizens. In response to this problem, we investigated what skills need to be developed to thwart the threat from FMI and propaganda proliferation on media platforms. The answer resulted in developing a concept like the risk management process foundational to Operational Security (OPSEC) but with a twist. Instead of protecting mission critical information Cognitive Security (COGSEC) strives to protect the cognitive processes of the individual from cognitive manipulation. COGSEC refers to practices, methodologies, and efforts made to safeguard cognitive processes ranging from awareness, perception, sensemaking, all the way to decision making. Misinformation and disinformation fueled by addictive social media design to capture attention pose the most significant threats to cognitive security and global stability, with increased calls for education programs to better prepare the 21st century workforce to build resiliency against dis- and misinformation. Media literacy and critical thinking programs have emerged as a promising avenue for building out such resiliency, but the research community has yet to reach consensus on key tenets of successful media literacy programs, and the efficacy of such curriculum has proven difficult to assess. To address this research gap, we developed Wellness and Independence in the Social Media Era (WISE), which is a human factors-based educational program that equips individuals with Cognitive Security skills to recognize and mitigate the effects of disinformation. WISE is an experiential-based curriculum that educates participants to identify, systematically evaluate, and counter disinformation in their environment. The Wellness and Independence in the Social Media Era (WISE) education program equips students with Cognitive Security skills, providing frameworks and toolkits for how to deliberately think through controversial topics commonly steeped in dis- and misinformation. The ‘attention economy’ we live in today profits from the time users spend on a given social media application, thereby motivating the designers to leverage human factors principles for bad purposes, namely addictive design features referred to as ‘dark patterns’. By recognizing how ‘dark patterns’ use HF-principles and the associated cognitive consequences, the WISE program developers created a holistic approach beyond media literacy skills to include metacognition, emotional intelligence, civil discourse, and storytelling. Major Matthew “Niner” Smokovitz IFC Fellow, Class of 2026 Space Operations Officer, USSF The Commercial Sky is the New High Ground In February 2022, commercial satellite images from Maxar Technologies showed Russian armor massing on Ukraine’s border—and then driving toward Kyiv. These images were available to journalists, allies, and civilians alike. Moscow lost the element of surprise not because of classified intelligence, but because of commercial space. That moment revealed something profound: the commercial sky has become the decisive high ground of modern security. Ukraine makes this reality clear. Its forces rely daily on commercial satellites for imagery, communications, and targeting. Without them, Kyiv would be blind. In early 2025, when the US briefly paused Maxar’s imagery support, Ukrainian drone strikes and artillery fire faltered almost immediately. Analysts called the pause “catastrophic,” linking it to battlefield failures and rising casualties. Commercial partnerships are not supplemental—they are essential. But dependence cuts both ways. Starlink sustained Ukraine’s communications when Russian cyberattacks crippled national networks. At the same time, Moscow struck Starlink ground terminals and jammed uplinks. Commercial space became both shield and target, lifeline and liability. Taiwan is the next test. Its defense hinges on spotting Chinese amphibious forces early and striking them fast. Without overhead visibility, Taipei cannot match Beijing’s tempo. In such a conflict, the US and its allies would lean on commercial radar satellites—able to see through clouds and darkness—and on commercial communications constellations to sustain dispersed forces across the Pacific. Beijing understands this. It is building jammers, lasers, and cyber tools aimed not only at US military satellites but also at the commercial networks Washington depends on. By targeting or intimidating these providers, China could fracture US power projection without firing a shot. The trend stretches beyond Europe and Asia. In the Persian Gulf, shipping firms now buy satellite imagery to monitor Iranian naval movements. Non-state actors purchase the same data. Strategic awareness—once reserved for nation-states—is now for sale. This democratization of transparency reshapes deterrence and complicates escalation control. Commercial space is also a legal challenge. Under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, states remain responsible for the companies they license. But what happens if a Chinese laser blinds a US-licensed satellite over Taiwan? Or if US commercial imagery directly enables a Ukrainian strike? These gaps create uncertainty adversaries can exploit. Equally critical is corporate power itself. In Ukraine, Maxar and Starlink shaped battlefield outcomes through boardroom decisions as much as battlefield actions. When corporations hold veto authority over wartime support, national security collides with private incentives. Other disruptive technologies—artificial intelligence, hypersonic weapons, electronic warfare—matter deeply, but none matches the immediacy of commercial space. AI requires integration into command systems. Hypersonic missiles are costly and scarce. Electronic warfare is powerful but geographically bound. By contrast, commercial constellations already span the globe, already outpace state systems in transparency, and are already accessible to allies, adversaries, and civilians alike. This is why commercial space is the defining national security trend of 2025—and why it will remain decisive in 2026. It democratizes awareness, accelerates targeting, and gives corporations unprecedented influence over the tempo of war. No other domain hands so much power simultaneously to militaries and markets. The path forward is clear. The Pentagon must lock in commercial partnerships with wartime guarantees, secure data pipelines against disruption, and build surge-launch capacity now. Failure would mean ceding the high ground—not through lack of weapons, but through lack of vision. In the contests ahead, the victor will not be the side with the most satellites, but the side that best controls the shared, conditional, and contested sky of the commercial high ground. The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, the US Space Force, the Department of War, or the US government. -------- https://www.darpa.mil/research/programs/next-generation-nonsurgical-neurotechnology#:~:text=Summary,for%20able%2Dbodied%20service%20members. N3: Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology Summary The Next-Generation Nonsurgical Neurotechnology (N3) program aims to develop high-performance, bi-directional brain-machine interfaces for able-bodied service members. Such interfaces would be enabling technology for diverse national security applications such as control of unmanned aerial vehicles and active cyber defense systems or teaming with computer systems to successfully multitask during complex military missions. Whereas the most effective, state-of-the-art neural interfaces require surgery to implant electrodes into the brain, N3 technology would not require surgery and would be man-portable, thus making the technology accessible to a far wider population of potential users. Noninvasive neurotechnologies such as the electroencephalogram and transcranial direct current stimulation already exist, but do not offer the precision, signal resolution, and portability required for advanced applications by people working in real-world settings. The envisioned N3 technology breaks through the limitations of existing technology by delivering an integrated device that does not require surgical implantation, but has the precision to read from and write to 16 independent channels within a 16mm3 volume of neural tissue within 50ms. Each channel is capable of specifically interacting with sub-millimeter regions of the brain with a spatial and temporal specificity that rivals existing invasive approaches. Individual devices can be combined to provide the ability to interface to multiple points in the brain at once. To enable future non-invasive brain-machine interfaces, N3 researchers are working to develop solutions that address challenges such as the physics of scattering and weakening of signals as they pass through skin, skull, and brain tissue, as well as designing algorithms for decoding and encoding neural signals that are represented by other modalities such as light, acoustic, or electro-magnetic energy. ---------- https://www.seedtable.com/best-neurotechnology-startups Seedtable logo Mentioned on: Wired TechCrunch TechCrunch Sign Up 69 Best Neurotechnology Startups to Watch in 2026 The Definitive Seedtable Ranking of Neurotechnology Startups We track 71,000+ companies and rank them dynamically using our Seedtable Score – a score that uses quantitative and qualitative data points to signal the momentum behind a company. We then monitor the list manually leveraging our expertise as founders and investors. There are 84 start-ups with an aggregate funding of $4.1b. The average funding per company in this subset is $59.2m. Last update to the database: Jan 6, 2026. See changelog. Location: Industry: Track over 71,000 companies Discover Fast-growing Global startups Seedtable uses technology and people to track over 71,000 companies to help you find the right ones to partner with. Pricing + Sign up Neuralink logo Neuralink 4 Funding Rounds $964.2m Money raised Neuralink is a company that develops brain-computer interface (BCI) devices to assist people with paralysis and blindness and technologies that may expand the abilities of humans. Industries: Robotics Artificial Intelligence (AI) Software Location: San Francisco Key people: Elon Musk linkedin Max Hodak ******@maxhodak.com Paul Merolla Paradromics logo Paradromics 3 Funding Rounds $34.0m Money raised Paradromics is an Austin, Texas-based company developing a high-volume bidirectional data streaming capabilities between brains and computers. Industries: Technology Healthcare Medicine Location: San Jose, California Austin, Texas Key people: Matt Angle (Entrepreneur) ******@paradromics.com Synchron logo Synchron 4 Funding Rounds $325.0m Money raised Synchron, Inc. is a technology company building implantable neural interface solutions, including endovascular brain-computer interface. Industries: Big data Biomedical engineering Neurotechnology Location: San Francisco Brooklyn United States Key people: Nicholas Opie Thomas Oxley ******@synchron.com Cala Health logo Cala Health 3 Funding Rounds $145.0m Money raised Cala Health offers bioelectronic medicines, medical devices, and neurotherapeutics for managing chronic health conditions. Industries: Neuroscience Connected Devices Healthcare Location: Burlingame, California Key people: Kate Rosenbluth ****.**********@calahealth.com Proportunity logo Proportunity 3 Funding Rounds $12.1m Money raised Artificial Intelligence company and FCA authorized mortgage lender in the UK helping renters purchase their first homes. Industries: Brain-computer interface Machine learning Artificial Intelligence (AI) Location: London Key people: Stefan Adrian Boronea ******.*******@proportunity.com Vadim Toader *****.******@proportunity.com Neurable logo Neurable 7 Funding Rounds $46.0m Money raised A brain-computer interface company building software and hardware products, neurotechnology tools that interpret human intent, measure emotion and provide telekinetic control of the digital world based on EEG signals. Industries: Virtual reality Augmented reality Neuroscience Location: Boston Cambridge, Massachusetts Key people: Adam Molnar ****@neurable.com James Hamet linkedin Ramses Alcaide ****@neurable.com BIOS Health Ltd logo BIOS Health Ltd 5 Funding Rounds $10.1m Money raised A full-stack neural interface company. BIOS is creating a hardware and software interface between the human nervous system and AI with the aim of developing AI-based neural treatments that recreate neural signal patterns capable of affecting the health of a person. Industries: Analytics Machine learning Artificial Intelligence (AI) Location: Cambridge, Cambridgeshire Key people: Emil Hewage linkedin Oliver Armitage linkedin Flow Neuroscience logo Flow Neuroscience 2 Funding Rounds $2.6m Money raised Flow Neuroscience is a Malmo, Sweden-based medical technology company developing treatments for mental health issues. The company offers a medication-free depression treatment that combines a brain stimulation wearable and an app-based therapy program. Industries: Healthcare Mental health Medical device Location: Malmö Key people: Daniel Månsson ******@flowneuroscience.com Halo Neuroscience logo Halo Neuroscience 1 Funding Rounds $13.0m Money raised Halo Neuroscience develops devices that use neurostimulation technology to target the brain to enhance performance for able and impaired users. Industries: Brain-computer interface Connected Devices Neurostimulation Location: San Francisco Key people: Lee von Kraus, PhD Brett Wingeier Daniel Chao InteraXon logo InteraXon 4 Funding Rounds $28.8m Money raised InteraXon develops and produces brain-sensing technology such as the Muse headband, an EEG device that interprets mental activity and aims to help with meditation and promote calmness. Industries: Wearable technology Consumer electronics Neurotechnology Location: Toronto Canada Key people: Chris Aimone *****@musehealth.ai Trevor Coleman linkedin Ariel Garten *****@choosemuse.com WiBotic logo WiBotic 5 Funding Rounds $18.4m Money raised WiBotic is a technology company specializing in wireless charging and power optimization solutions. Industries: Robotics Wireless Power engineering Location: Seattle United States Key people: Joshua Smith ***@cs.uw.edu Ben Waters (entrepreneur) ***.******@wibotic.com Motorica logo Motorica 4 Funding Rounds $5.8m Money raised Motorika, a Russian developer and manufacturer of robotic functional traction and bionic arm prostheses for children and adults Industries: Brain-computer interface Neurotechnology Neuroscience Location: Moscow Key people: Ilya Chekh **@motorica.org Vasiliy Khlebnikov linkedin Koniku (company) logo Koniku (company) 3 Funding Rounds $1.7m Money raised A startup that is building microprocessor and other types of chips with wetware biological neurons. It has applications in sensing, control and computation. Industries: Neuroscience Neurotechnology Biotechnology Location: San Rafael, California Key people: Salys Christina Verge Genomics logo Verge Genomics 5 Funding Rounds $134.1m Money raised Verge Genomics is a company focused on the discovery and development of drugs for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases with the use of machine learning and computational genomics. Industries: Neurotechnology Neuroscience Drug discovery Location: United States South San Francisco, California San Francisco Key people: Jason Chen *****@vergegenomics.com Alice Zhang *****@vergegenomics.com BrainCo logo BrainCo 3 Funding Rounds $6.0m Money raised A company utilizing BMI and Neurofeedback to optimize brain potential. Industries: Wearable technology Healthcare Consumer biotechnology Location: Massachusetts Somerville, Massachusetts Boston Key people: Bicheng Han *******.***@brainco.tech Neuroelectrics logo Neuroelectrics 2 Funding Rounds $35.9m Money raised Neuroelectrics provides devices and technology for EEG-based brain monitoring, brain stimulation, home therapy research and head modeling. The company manufacturers the StarStim a neuro-stimulator using the Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS). Industries: Biosensor Big data Biomedical engineering Location: Barcelona Key people: Ana Maiques ***.*******@neuroelectrics.com Giulio Ruffini twitter Ekso Bionics logo Ekso Bionics 5 Funding Rounds $70.9m Money raised Ekso Bionics is a Richmond, California-based company founded in 2005 by Homayoon Kazerooni, Nathan Harding, Russ Angold and Max Scheder-Bieschin.