A Posture of Paradigmatic Convergence

The Department of Defense FY 2026 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDTE) budget request marks a strategic inflection that reflects a doctrinal shift toward convergent disruptive technologies, and with it, a re-posturing of how deterrence, defense and decisive command will be engaged on the near-future battlefield.

The marked expansion of RDTE funding reveals a purposeful pivot toward an integrated convergence of technologies. Artificial intelligence (AI), quantum, hypersonic and space systems are not engaged as mere tools, but are now seen as emerging operational paradigms. Doctrine, procurement, and organizational constructs are aimed at embracing this technologic convergence to develop and leverage cross‑domain deterrence through synergy. This will necessitate assessing and addressing force capabilities, as well as operational considerations, constraints, and concrete paths toward de-limiting how these technologies can – and perhaps should – be responsibly employed in near-future warfare. Taking each in turn:

 Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Tiered iterations of autonomous AI, being allocated over $2.2 billion across programs, is clearly a prime operational imperative. This matters because distributed, multi-domain operations (e.g.- robotic and iteratively autonomous UAVs, UUVs, and UGV platforms) can execute reconnaissance, logistics, and strike missions with minimal human-in-the-loop exposure. The AI-enabled analytics that are essential to these systems can certainly mitigate information overload and support real-time command and control decisions. Yet several operational challenges arise. Imbuing autonomy into command and control and weapon systems is more than a technological progression; rather, it represents paradigmatic change.

Concepts like mission command, delegation, and pre‑authorization frameworks must be updated to fit AI‑driven systems and the accelerated battle rhythm(s) they foster. Certification protocols must evolve to integrate AI system validation, assurance, accountability, and adversary-resistance standards. And, perhaps most importantly, human–machine teaming through cognitive interoperability (viz. to ensure that human users retain situational awareness, command authority and moral agency) will be essential. To this latter point, it will therefore be equally important to surveille, analyze, and respond to adversaries’ postures regarding human positioning in-the-loop, the ethical precepts that dictate human control, and responsibility, and how their stances and standards can be engaged in ways that enable the US to “fight for right and freedom, and (still) keep our honor clean”.

Quantum

The new budgetary line item, “Quantum Applications” demonstrates that quantum science has matured from theoretical curiosity to viable enabler of defense capability; gaining in both tactical usefulness and strategic potential across navigation, encryption, and sensing domains.

Key applications of quantum systems include the use of quantum inertial sensors that are resistant to GPS denial and spoofing; and using quantum components as essential elements of weapons’ and logistics’ systems. Post‑quantum cryptography (PQC) is co-evolving with quantum computing to secure command and control messaging in battlefield communications networks. And small-form quantum magnetometers and gravitometers can detect subterranean facilities, submarines, and/or missile launches, to afford expanded (terrestrial- or space-based) threat awareness and detection. Moreover, our vulnerability to other’s quantum sensing capabilities may mean an imperative for using quantum capabilities for undersea protection.

Clearly, quantum systems and functions can afford appreciable benefit to, and fortified superiority of extant weapons platforms. But integrating these functions into existing operational architectures will require coordinated systems that can integrate and process quantum-derived data. This will necessitate revised hardware, software, protocols, doctrine, and tactics to ensure that quantum capabilities can be exercised, remain resilient, and be capably sustained in contested scenarios and settings.

Hypersonics

The budget’s multi-billion investment in hypersonic systems is tethered to both AI targeting and quantum navigation. Thus, hypersonics increase the need for (1) quantum-enhanced inertial navigation to provide real-time trajectory fidelity in those situations where GPS is denied, and (2) very high-speed trajectory optimization to enable dynamic guidance under rapidly changing conditions. While both automaticity and perhaps some degree of autonomy can facilitate and fortify these functions, integrated command and control oversight will be required to optimize technology capability and maintain human positioning in or on the loop to ensure accountability, and safeguard responsible engagement.

Space

With the U.S. Space Force receiving over $29 billion in RDTE funding, space operations are becoming a prioritized domain for developing convergent technological force superiority. Indeed, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, space can be seen as a ‘final frontier’ for the convergent use of the abovementioned technologies, to include the use of quantum sensors aboard satellites to enhance threat detection and optimize navigation; AI-augmented systems for identification, collision-avoidance, and targeting of orbital ordnance; and the use of hypersonic technology to enable low-latency space-to-terrestrial targeting of various weapon systems. However, joint command and control architectures must be configured to support this space-enabled design, and the shift terrestrially based models, and this will require a redoubling of effort and resources if space is to be engaged in ways that meet and remain apace with ongoing advancements made by near-peer competitors.

Blurring the Boundaries…Bolstering the Biologic Effects of Tech

The integration of these technologies also force-multiplies biological and cognitive warfare capabilities. AI systems allow for rapid modeling and predictive analytics in synthetic biology, enabling faster design of gene-edited agents for targeted disruption of adversary personnel, crops, or ecosystems. Quantum sensors can detect subtle physiological changes, enabling remote assessments of targeted groups’ health and functional capabilities. Unmanned and iteratively autonomous delivery platforms (e.g.- drones and microsatellites) can be leveraged to deploy biologically active agents covertly and with minimal attribution.

In the cognitive domain, AI-enhanced behavioral modeling enables targeted psychological operations, while biodata harvesting and analyses can facilitate precision influence campaigns—blending deepfakes, cognitively-resonant content, and disruptive messaging. Future battlefield tools may even include non-lethal neuromodulation devices guided by AI for control of key individuals, groups, or adversary incapacitation.

These technologies blur the boundary between physical and cognitive warfare and enable strategic disruption without traditional force projection. This technological convergence necessitates renewed focus on policy, oversight, and training to (1) ensure ethical deployment within the bounds of international law, and (2) revisit global policies and laws that are dated and thus incapable of meeting the reality of these growing technical capabilities.

Human Capital and Control: The Centerpiece of Tech-Driven Warfare

These technologies foster the need for equivalent investment in new training pipelines and programs that are as dynamic as the systems that they will employ. Toward these goals, I propose the following recommendations:

• Deep‑tech curriculums at professional military education institutions should be developed that address the fundamentals and engage wargaming and simulation exercises entailing these emerging disruptive technologies.
• Cross‑domain task forces should be established that rotate operators across disruptive technology domains to foster interdisciplinary literacy and operational fluency.
• Doctrine should be iteratively reviewed and revised to explicitly integrate multi‑domain technologic convergence to fortify capabilities in command and control.
• Ethical principles, guidelines and protocols should be re-addressed, assessed, and re-defined as needed to ensure human accountability and moral responsibility in all domains and dimensions of disruptive technology use.
• Multinational discourses should be engaged toward developing compliance frameworks and standards to guide and govern the use of these emerging technologies in military contexts.

Investment for Strategic Impact

The DoD FY 2026 RDTE budgetary investment in disruptive technology is a transformative step and a major leap forward in S/T integration in warfighting. Yet capital alone does not guarantee capability; fully exploiting the capabilities these technologies afford for strategic deterrence and battlefield effectiveness demands matching system-level innovation with institutional agility.

I opine that this means (1) embedding technology within the DoD doctrinal core; (2) cultivating a culture of human‑machine trust through training and trials-through-practice; and (3) reviewing, revising and/or rewriting anew command and control frameworks and protocols to capabilize technologic convergence and maintain human responsibility.  It may be that the FY 2026 RDTE budget is less a line item and more of a mandate. Let us ensure we treat it as such.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions presented in this essay are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of the United States government, Department of Defense or the National Defense University.

Dr. James Giordano is the director of the Center for Disruptive Technology and Future Warfare of the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University.