Trump's AI Ambitions: Strategic Priority Meets Complex Reality

In the early days of his return to the White House, President Donald Trump has made AI a cornerstone of his technological agenda, marking a decisive shift in the US's approach to AI development. Yet beneath the bold proclamations of intent to achieve ‘AI dominance’ lies a complex web of political, technical and social challenges that may complicate the administration's ambitious vision.

The rescission of the Biden administration's 2023 executive order on AI safety represents more than a mere policy reversal – it signals a fundamental realignment of US priorities in the global AI race. Where Biden sought to establish guardrails for responsible AI development, Trump's approach appears to prioritise speed and competitive advantage, particularly vis-à-vis China. This strategic pivot is perhaps best exemplified by the White House announcement of the Stargate Project, a private sector collaboration between OpenAI, SoftBank and other tech giants that brings Silicon Valley's innovative capacity under the umbrella of national strategic interests. If the Project realises its stated aims, more than $500 billion worth of investment will pour into data centres over the next four years.

International and Domestic Power Dynamics 

However, the emergence of China-based DeepSeek's latest model in the early days of the Trump presidency serves as a sobering reminder that technological advancement often defies political timelines and national boundaries. DeepSeek's achievement in training an advanced AI model with relatively modest computational resources challenges core assumptions baked into US policies about the nature of AI competition. It suggests that raw computing power and financial resources – areas where the US holds traditional advantages – may not be the decisive factors in determining leadership in AI development.

The domestic political landscape presents its own set of challenges to Trump's AI agenda. While Congress has yet to enact comprehensive AI legislation, state legislatures across the country are not standing idle. From Sacramento, California to Albany, New York, hundreds of AI-related bills are under consideration, threatening to create a complex patchwork of regulations that could significantly impact AI development and deployment. The compliance costs associated with navigating diverse state-level requirements could prove particularly burdensome for smaller AI companies, potentially stifling the very innovation the administration seeks to accelerate.

This regulatory fragmentation raises crucial questions about federal pre-emption. The US Constitution establishes that federal law constitutes ‘the supreme law of the land’, supersedes conflicting state laws. What qualifies as a conflict between federal and state law is a fact-intensive inquiry. If and when Congress finally passes comprehensive AI legislation, its interaction with state laws will depend heavily on the scope and specificity of federal pre-emption provisions. Historical precedents in telecommunications and financial services regulation suggest that achieving the right balance between federal oversight and state autonomy will be crucial for creating a coherent regulatory framework that promotes innovation while protecting public interests.

The Need for Stronger AI Infrastructure 

The administration's push for AI dominance also faces practical challenges related to infrastructure and resources. The energy requirements for training and running advanced AI systems are substantial, and the associated costs will likely be passed on to consumers. This raises questions about public support for aggressive AI development when faced with tangible economic trade-offs. The experience of regions that have seen sharp increases in electricity prices due to data centre concentration serves as a cautionary tale about the real-world implications of rapid technological expansion.

Moreover, the administration's embrace of private sector partnerships, while potentially accelerating development, raises questions about accountability and oversight. The Stargate Project's announcement from the White House podium blurs traditional lines between public and private initiatives in strategic technology development. This approach, while potentially effective for rapid advancement, may create challenges for ensuring transparent governance and equitable distribution of benefits.

What to Expect from Trump’s AI Agenda

Looking ahead, the success of Trump's AI agenda will likely depend on his administration's ability to navigate these various challenges while maintaining public support and international competitiveness. The six-month timeline announced in Trump’s AI executive order for developing an action plan toward ‘AI dominance’ seems ambitious given the complexity of the task at hand. The administration will need to balance its desire for rapid advancement with the practical realities of federal-state relations, infrastructure limitations, and public opinion.

The global context adds another layer of complexity. DeepSeek's achievements suggest that the international AI landscape is more dynamic and competitive than ever. The assumption that US technological and financial advantages will automatically translate into AI leadership may need reassessment. This reality calls for a more nuanced approach that considers not just raw development speed but also sustainability, security, and strategic partnerships.

As the administration moves forward with its AI agenda, the key question remains whether its strategic approach aligns with the technical and political realities of AI development. Adding further complexity to this landscape is Trump's evolving relationship with Elon Musk, whose appointment as head of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency marks an unprecedented convergence of private sector AI development and public administration. Musk's dual role as both a government official and the leader of his own AI venture raises questions about potential conflicts of interest in shaping national AI policy. His public scepticism regarding the Stargate Project's claimed initial $100 billion funding base has created visible tensions within the administration.

The friction between Musk's scepticism of the Stargate Project and Trump's enthusiastic endorsement of it highlights broader questions about the administration's approach to vetting and promoting AI initiatives. This tension could either lead to more rigorous scrutiny of private sector claims or potentially fragment the administration's AI strategy along competing lines of influence.

The coming months will reveal whether Trump can transform his vision of US AI dominance into a practical and sustainable reality, or whether the complex interplay of state regulations, resource constraints, and international competition will necessitate a different approach to advancing US interests in the global AI race.

© Kevin Frazier, 2025, published by RUSI with permission of the author

The views expressed in this Commentary are the author’s, and do not represent those of RUSI or any other institution.

For terms of use, see Website Ts&Cs of Use.

Have an idea for a Commentary you’d like to write for us? Send a short pitch to commentaries@rusi.org and we’ll get back to you if it fits into our research interests. Full guidelines for contributors can be found here.