Panel on Industrial Policy for National Security | Hoover Institution
Steve Davis highlighted the challenges of industrial policy. They are hard for the political process to assess, rife with unintended consequences, hard to fix, and hard to end when obsolete. A basic challenge is that we execute industrial policy with the government we have – not the one policy mavens imagine. Successful industrial policies often involve clear, easy-to-grasp objectives for which success or failure is evident to voters and political leaders. In contrast, industrial policy initiatives in pursuit of vague, open-ended objectives are especially problematic. Davis also explained why import tariffs are poorly suited for most national security objectives. He warned that a heavy reliance on industry policy fosters a rent-seeking outlook among business leaders. Despite these challenges, Davis noted that there is a case for some forms of industrial policy just as there is a case for government provision of national defense.Josh Rauh noted that free trade is an important foundation for prosperity, but the assumptions underlying it break down when a strategic rival like China can weaponize supply chains, dominate strategic inputs through state-driven distortion, and leave the United States unable to rebuild critical capacity quickly in a crisis. Chinese-linked inputs now run through important U.S. weapons systems while America faces a near-total lack of rare earth domestic refining and processing capacity. At the same time, policymakers must resist turning every trade issue into a “national security” issue, because doing so dilutes attention and credibility away from truly defense-critical sectors like rare earths, defense-grade semiconductors, and certain specialty minerals. The right response is therefore not the scattershot protectionism or subsidization of certain industries that we have seen in US industrial policy, but rather (1) removal of regulations that get in the way of domestic production in strategic sectors; and (2) a narrower and more disciplined industrial policy centered on supply-chain transparency, targeted DoD procurement commitments, and stricter standards for what qualifies as a national security intervention.
Philip Zelikow distinguished industrial policy to improve national competitiveness from industrial policy for national security. There he defined a narrower goal and focused on the capacity to produce essential goods or technologies at scale. He noted that the ecosystems for innovative production in the US have withered in comparison to the World War II years, although the US may again face challenges on that scale. Calling out contemporary challenges, as in semiconductors, Zelikow used World War II experience to illustrate the policy problems associated with “resilience” and drew out the ingredients of successful industrial policymaking.
Dan Wang spoke about China's long record of using industrial policy to pursue technological ambitions. These efforts have created American dependences on Chinese rare earths, electronics products, and pharmaceuticals. Dan spoke about Beijing's relative tolerance for waste, which it tries to control through anticorruption measures. And he points out that China has developed new technologies based on present foundations.
To read the event summary, click the following link
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/4-1-26-Panel%20on%20Industrial%20Policy%20for%20National%20Security.pdf
To read Steve Davis’s paper, click the following link
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Davis%20-%20Ten%20Lessons%20for%20Industrial%20Policy%20and%20A%20ChartWritten%20Remarks.pdf
To read Steve Davis’s slides, click the following link
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Davis-Ten%20Lessons%20for%20Industrial%20Policy%20and%20ONe%20Chart.pdf
To read Josh Rauh’s slides, click the following link
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Rauh%20-%20Hoover%20Industrial%20Policy%20Presentation.pdf
To read Philip Zelikow’s slides, click the following link
https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Zelikow-Industrial_Policy_Presentation.pdf
__________
The opinions expressed on this channel are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.
© 2026 by the Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University.
🔔 Subscribe for more discussions: @HooverInstitution Receive SMS online on sms24.me
TubeReader video aggregator is a website that collects and organizes online videos from the YouTube source. Video aggregation is done for different purposes, and TubeReader take different approaches to achieve their purpose.
Our try to collect videos of high quality or interest for visitors to view; the collection may be made by editors or may be based on community votes.
Another method is to base the collection on those videos most viewed, either at the aggregator site or at various popular video hosting sites.
TubeReader site exists to allow users to collect their own sets of videos, for personal use as well as for browsing and viewing by others; TubeReader can develop online communities around video sharing.
Our site allow users to create a personalized video playlist, for personal use as well as for browsing and viewing by others.
@YouTubeReaderBot allows you to subscribe to Youtube channels.
By using @YouTubeReaderBot Bot you agree with YouTube Terms of Service.
Use the @YouTubeReaderBot telegram bot to be the first to be notified when new videos are released on your favorite channels.
Look for new videos or channels and share them with your friends.
You can start using our bot from this video, subscribe now to Panel on Industrial Policy for National Security | Hoover Institution
What is YouTube?
YouTube is a free video sharing website that makes it easy to watch online videos. You can even create and upload your own videos to share with others. Originally created in 2005, YouTube is now one of the most popular sites on the Web, with visitors watching around 6 billion hours of video every month.
