Biotechnology: –
"The interesting thing to program in the 21st century isn't going to be computers – it's biology." – Tom Knight
The United States (U.S.) is the world leader in biotechnology (biotech) and innovation. Biotech availability has increased competition in the global market, threatening America's dominance in the industry. Biotechnology is simply defined as the "application of biology for useful purposes." It is not a defined list of products or industries but a set of "enabling technologies" that are industrialized and used to replace chemical compounds. The biotech industry is one of the world's fastest-growing, lucrative, and expansive global markets, introducing new scientific methods and bio-products at an unprecedented pace. Research-intensive biotech corporations have effectively redefined modern medicine, enhancing health care and developing techniques to increase human performance at the molecular level. Industry revenues exceed the global semiconductor market and contribute more than seven percent of America's gross domestic product (GDP). Advancements in bioengineering and manufacturing led to increased agricultural, pharmaceutical, and petrochemical productivity within the U.S. This report provides an overview of the biotech industry, its application to the defense industrial base, global competition, and its impact on U.S. policy and strategy to protect national security while maintaining the leading edge in the field.
Biotechnology revolutionizes the field of genetic editing, as evidenced by the Human Genome Project (HGP), by merging engineering with life sciences to enhance the human condition. While research is limited, recent studies open new gateways to advanced genetic manipulation. Ultimately, successful biotechnologies will change a living organism's ability to perform new functions and produce new materials. This level of molecular control poses several ethical concerns and has a strong potential for malicious use. Advanced biotech has become one of the gravest threats to homeland security if it gets in the wrong hands.
Ethical concerns regarding human enhancement include questions about safety, efficacy, distributive justice, and autonomy. One key question in the debate over the ethics of applying biotech for human genome modification is whether such interventions are morally acceptable. Some argue that improvements are unethical because they involve health risks and could create social inequalities. In contrast, others maintain that scientists can justify enhancements to improve quality of life and increase autonomy. A second issue is accessibility to these scientific services. Additionally, there are fears that irrational actors could use improvements for nefarious purposes, such as creating "super soldiers," enhanced biological weapons, or enhancing intelligence to gain superiority in current and future geopolitical environments.
The U.S. approach to biotech is conservative, which is evident in its restrictions on funding and practical application. U.S. law does not prohibit most genomic research, yet policies restrict the application of human gene editing technologies and prevent government funding to advance the research. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), responsible for U.S. research funding, has strict policies against human gene editing that explicitly restrict gene modifying technologies on human embryos. Also, the National Institute of Health (NIH) has similar policies to restrict funding against technologies that result in modified inheritable genetic traits. Therefore, many of these research initiatives depend on private funding. The lack of government funding for innovative biotech startups limits gene-editing research and the U.S.'s ability to compete in the global market.
While Western nations continue debating the ethics of bioengineering, China and Russia are advancing their biotech industries. China considers its biotech industry a critical component of its long-term national security objectives. Recent Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) work conducted by He Jiankui and human germline modification experiments conducted by Dr. John Zhang indicates China's aggressive, innovative posture within their biotech industry. Additionally, it highlights the need for transnational treaties to govern ethical practices and the safe use of technology.
Russia has kept a close hold on the productivity of its biotech industry, although historically, they are known for their aggressive dual-use biotech research program. The Russian Biopreparat bioweapons program remained concealed within the legitimate confounds of Russia's civilian biodefense program until the late 1980s. While international law eradicated offensive biological programs globally, the U.S. intelligence community reports that both countries maintain limited offensive biological weapons capability, possibly shielded by dual-use laboratories.* As the U.S. and its competitors race to be the first to dominate the field of biotechnology, the U.S. must implement policies that strike a balance between legislature and ethics to manage innovation while ensuring social protection and America's competitive edge.
Read the report →