“The coming war is going to be a technology war. The country’s top innovators feel that there is a huge disconnect between what the U.S. military ecosystem can produce and what’s possible if we engaged civilians to develop weapon systems for critical technologies…The only solution is to outsource advanced weapons systems development outside of the traditional services and government ecosystem and hand the development to civilians.”
-Vannevar Bush to President Roosevelt in 1940
So said one of our country’s greatest innovators to the president of the United States. And the president agreed, making a series of decisions that, without which, the Allies may have lost World War II.
The story of how Roosevelt outsourced advanced weapons systems development and acquisition is fascinating and also critical to the present moment. The incoming Trump administration has a historic, once-in-a-century opportunity to do something similar today and give the United States a stream of advanced capabilities and weapons that will allow the United States to deter Russia and China or — failing that — defeat them in a war.
From MIT to the White House
In June 1940, Vannevar Bush, ex-MIT dean of engineering, along with the country’s top science and research administrators, believed the United States was woefully unprepared and ill-equipped for a war driven by technology. They felt the U.S. military had little idea of what science could provide in the event of war, and scientists were wholly in the dark as to what the military needed. In their view, advanced weapons could be created faster if they could be designed by civilian scientists and engineers in universities and companies.
The scientists drafted a one-page plan for an organization that would look for new technologies that military labs weren’t working on such as radar, proximity fuses, anti-submarine warfare, and nuclear weapons. This organization, the National Defense Research Committee, was placed in the Executive Office of the President.
A year later, Roosevelt gave the group permission to go past research and development to acquire weapons systems. The group was renamed the Office of Scientific Research and Development. They rapidly built prototypes of weapons (e.g., radar, electronic warfare, and rockets) and used existing contractors to mass produce them. Roosevelt’s decision gave the United States a head start for employing science in the war effort.
Radical Change, Now
It’s abundantly clear that the U.S. defense ecosystem is being challenged by the proliferation of commercial technology, hobbled by its legacy systems and prime contractors, and sabotaged by its own acquisition system, rendering it unable to keep pace with threats to the nation.
Simultaneously, the rise of defense-oriented startups and venture capital firms have proven that a commercial ecosystem is more than capable of rapid delivery of most of the advanced weapons needed to deter or win a war. Companies like SpaceX, Anduril, Palantir, Saronic, and Vannevar Labs have proven they can deliver at speeds unmatched by existing contractors. Defense- and dual-use-oriented venture capital firms have stepped up to fund this ecosystem, collectively investing tens of billions in new defense technologies.
But the Defense Department is organized for a world that no longer exists. While there have been innovative experiments in innovation such as the Defense Innovation Unit, Replicator, and the Office of Strategic Capital — all of which should continue — the overall glacial pace of acquisition and the capture of the status quo by the few prime contractors threatens our nation. In a perfect world, a bipartisan Congress would reorganize the Defense Department to integrate with this new wave of private companies and capital. But that isn’t politically feasible in the time America has left to prepare for the possibility of major war, which may be as little as 18 months. That’s where Vannevar Bush’s insights are critical for the present day.
The United States needs to outsource advanced weapons systems development to private industry in areas that startups and scale-ups already lead or could move faster in: AI, drones, space, biotech, networking, and cyber.
A New Office of Scientific Research and Development
The Trump administration should establish an organization modeled after the World War II–era Office of Scientific Research and Development. It would focus on developing systems that are inexpensive and software-based, and with relatively shorter lifecycles of three to ten years. Its approach would rely on outsourcing projects to private industry, concentrating on solving specific problems with speed and innovation.
This office would have the authority to define and issue prototype requirements on behalf of the geographic combatant commands, enabling those commands to purchase solutions directly. To stay ahead of emerging needs, the office would embed representatives with these commands to observe their operations, investigate challenges, and prioritize critical problems. It would also be empowered to select solutions based not on the lowest cost but on their ability to deliver the best and fastest deployment. Winning solutions would be supported with guaranteed production contracts to ensure swift delivery.
In addition, the office would take responsibility for integration and overall system strategy, managing how these systems are deployed, fielded, and supported. Major defense contractors would be incentivized to collaborate with the office as providers of advanced subsystems, integrators of new technologies, or even acquirers of innovative systems. Tax incentives could be offered to encourage the deployment and fielding of these solutions, creating opportunities for partnerships between traditional industry leaders and emerging technology companies. For example, a collaboration between a traditional defense prime contractor like Lockheed Martin and a newer technology company like Anduril could generate significant synergies.
Meanwhile, the traditional military services would retain responsibility for long-term acquisition programs requiring formal budgeting processes, extended supply chains, and decades of support. Established defense contractors would remain the primary suppliers for these complex and enduring systems that require sophisticated integration and long-term maintenance.
Finally, the office would rigorously evaluate the portfolios of military research labs and federally funded research centers, eliminating projects that the private sector can already handle effectively. These institutions would then be free to concentrate on tasks the private sector cannot address, such as fundamental research, advanced weapon systems, and programs requiring timelines of 10 years or more. This approach would ensure that both public and private efforts are focused on their respective strengths, maximizing efficiency and innovation.
The Path to Success
The success of the proposed “Office of Rapid Development and Deployment” will depend on a combination of clear goals, strong collaboration, dedicated resources, and effective integration of the commercial sector to address practical military challenges with speed and precision.
A central element of this success will be establishing clear goals. The immediate threats posed by adversaries such as China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea provide a unifying purpose: to rapidly develop and deliver cutting-edge technologies, advanced weapon systems, and innovative operating concepts that deter aggression and secure victory in conflict. This clarity of mission will ensure the office remains focused on addressing the most pressing challenges.
Rapid deployment of solutions is another key priority. The office will concentrate on identifying and resolving specific, actionable problems such as developing and deploying autonomous vehicles, creating AI-enabled systems, and leveraging commercial access to space. These solutions must be deployable in the near term to maximize their impact.
Interdisciplinary collaboration will play a vital role in the office’s operations. Teams will include founders, private investors, scientists, engineers, and military innovators from diverse fields such as AI, autonomy, quantum computing, cybersecurity, physics, and engineering. Financial experts, contracting specialists, and acquisition professionals will also contribute, ensuring seamless project execution and alignment with military needs.
The office will prioritize rapid prototyping and testing to address challenges efficiently. By working closely with combatant commands to deeply understand operational problems, the office will iterate designs based on field performance and immediate requirements. Agile development methods will be employed to accelerate the design, testing, and refinement process, ensuring solutions can be delivered promptly to areas of responsibility.
Collaboration with the private sector is essential. Startups, venture capital, private equity, and established defense companies will be mobilized to support the office’s initiatives. Major defense contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon Technologies, Northrop Grumman, and Huntington Ingalls, will work alongside these newer players to combine expertise and drive innovation.
Finally, the office will leverage existing Department of Defense innovation efforts, such as those led by the Defense Innovation Unit and initiatives like Replicator. By embedding personnel to anticipate emerging combatant command needs, the office can build on these foundations, creating a seamless network of innovation and rapid problem-solving. This integration will enable the office to stay ahead of evolving threats and deliver timely, effective solutions.
Who Should Run It?
The leader of the Office of Rapid Development and Deployment should be carefully chosen to meet a range of critical qualifications. This individual must be a trusted advisor to President Donald Trump, possess a deep understanding of technology, demonstrate the ability to assess venture capital portfolios and select top domain experts, and bring both a problem-solving mindset and charismatic leadership to the role.
As a trusted advisor, the head of the office must have a close relationship with the president to influence policy effectively. This connection will be essential to ensuring that startups and private capital are positioned as central players in the office’s efforts. Their ability to navigate high-level decision-making will give the office the authority and credibility needed to drive its ambitious agenda.
The leader must also be a visionary who can articulate a compelling strategy for how startups and private capital can be mobilized to close technological gaps with adversaries. Their ability to inspire confidence and respect among diverse stakeholders — ranging from startup founders and venture capitalists to military leaders and policymakers — will be essential to building momentum and fostering collaboration.
Additionally, the leader must secure congressional support to obtain substantial federal funding for the office. This requires a combination of strategic insight and political acumen to demonstrate the importance of the office’s mission and gain bipartisan backing.
The focus on practical outcomes will be paramount. The leader must emphasize solutions that can be rapidly deployed to military commands, prioritizing projects with the greatest potential impact. By ensuring that funding and resources are directed toward high-priority initiatives, they will drive tangible results and strengthen the office’s credibility.
Ultimately, this role requires someone who can seamlessly bridge the worlds of technology, defense, and government while maintaining a sharp focus on delivering innovative, effective, and timely solutions to the challenges facing the nation.
Who fits this description? Not many. The only candidates I can think of are Elon Musk, Trae Stephens, Stephen Feinberg, Raj Shah, and Mike Brown.
A Once-in-a-Century Opportunity
The stakes have never been higher, and the path ahead demands the audacity of visionaries who can break free from the inertia of the status quo. Just as Vannevar Bush once harnessed the ingenuity of America’s best minds to outpace the enemies of his time, we now face a moment of similar urgency and promise. If the United States can empower its boldest innovators to lead, not as bureaucrats but as pioneers of rapid technological dominance, we can secure not just victory in the wars of tomorrow but the preservation of the values that make our nation worth defending. The future hinges on our ability to act decisively, to embrace radical change, and to once again make history — not by clinging to the comforts of tradition but by seizing the opportunities of transformation. This is not merely a call to action; it is a rallying cry for a nation that must once again trust its greatest minds to deliver when it matters most.
Steve Blank is an adjunct professor at Stanford and a founding member at Stanford’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation.
Image: Truman Presidential Library via Wikimedia Commons
