The Trump administration’s National Security Science and Technology Strategy lists undersea capabilities first among its three key priorities for battlefield dominance and power projection — even before space and artificial intelligence. While those priorities aren’t necessarily listed in order of importance, the fact that submarines and undersea assets are mentioned at the top is a clear acknowledgment of how crucial those capabilities are in the 21st century.

National Security Correspondent Bill Gertz has more on exactly why America’s submarine fleet is the best in the world and how high a priority it is for the Pentagon to keep it that way. 

Navy submarines, both nuclear missile and conventional attack boats, remain a vital mainstay of U.S. military power and strategic nuclear deterrence. For example, military leaders project that U.S. submarine power is a key deterrent for Chinese plans to launch an amphibious assault across the 100-mile-wide Taiwan Strait.

The Pentagon has opened the application process for its National Security Fund Finance program. The controversial plan involves giving government loans to private investment funds, which will then add their own private capital to the mix and invest in companies that promise to deliver the critical materials needed for missiles, aircraft and other advanced military technology.

It’s part of the Trump administration’s aggressive push to transform America’s defense and critical minerals industries. But some analysts warn that private capital firms have fundamentally different interests than the U.S. military.

Private capital funds can apply for the loans online. The application section, posted on the U.S. General Services Administration website, includes a lengthy document explaining the program, a brief legal questionnaire for companies, and an “investment track record” form. The application period runs through Nov. 1. The Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Capital is running the program.

Threat Status has asked the Pentagon many detailed questions about the NSFF initiative but has received no answers. And don’t forget: A growing number of prominent Republicans have serious questions about other aspects of the Trump administration’s defense industrial investment strategy.

American military installations need reliable power, even if an adversary attack takes down local electric grids. And that’s where nuclear microreactors could come in.

In a wide-ranging exclusive interview on the latest episode of the Threat Status podcast, Space Force Col. Eamon R. Murray explains why his installation, Colorado’s Buckley Space Force Base, is in line to receive one of the first nuclear microreactors as part of a groundbreaking federal program. 

The microreactor will provide power to the sprawling installation independently of local power grids. 

“This is a good news story. This is not a risky endeavor. This is a good thing for Buckley. This is a good thing for national defense. This is a good thing for the local community,” Col. Murray said.

Threat Status Correspondents Jacob Wirtschafter and Ahmad Al Kwaider have a detailed explanation of the rapidly rising tensions between Israel and Turkey, which could superheat a Middle East that’s already close to boiling.

Here’s a quick recap of the most recent key developments: Israel this week bombed a Syrian air base in Abu al-Duhur in eastern Idlib province that Jerusalem said was being retrofitted to host Turkish forces. Turkey explicitly denied that assertion. Thirty-six hours later, about 100 Israeli soldiers moved into a Syrian village in Quneitra province, a move that drew condemnation from Ankara, Riyadh, Cairo, Doha and even Washington.

Turkey has emerged as a fierce critic of Israel’s conduct in the war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and its military campaign — alongside the U.S. — against Iran. Ankara also takes exception to Israel’s military moves in Syria. Just this week, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said Israeli attacks on Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are among the greatest threats to the rebuilding country’s stability.

The growing friction between those two major players is one of the biggest wild cards for the future of the region.

In the years to come, America’s intelligence agencies will surely face tough questions about their assessments leading up to the U.S. war against Iran. How confident was the agency that military strikes were the best option to induce Iran to negotiate in good faith? What was the likelihood of a popular uprising and regime change in Tehran?

Moving forward, it’s up to the CIA to provide clear insights into Iran’s likely moves, writes regular Threat Status contributor Daniel N. Hoffman. 

Mr. Hoffman, a retired CIA Clandestine Services officer, says that at this crucial moment in the conflict, political and military leaders in the Trump administration will lean heavily on the agency.

“The CIA is on the hook to assess with the highest level of confidence Iran’s future plans and intentions,” Mr. Hoffman writes. “Will Iran embark on a nuclear breakout while seeking to reconstitute its ballistic missile inventory? Will the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps assist Hezbollah in developing a fleet of surveillance and attack drones designed to take advantage of Israel’s lack of strategic depth?”

• Aug. 25-26 — Counter UAS Summit, Institute for Defense and Government Advancement

• Aug. 27 — 2026 Navy Summit, Potomac Officers Club

• Aug. 27 — AI and Autonomy on the Modern Battlefield, Atlantic Council

• Sept. 3 — The AI Open-Weight Debate: Balancing Innovation and Security, Center for a New American Security

• Sept. 9 — Bend but Do Not Break: Shaping the Future of the All-Volunteer Force, Center for Strategic & International Studies