The American Leninist-Brain Trust Republic: Text of President Trump's Executive Order, "Launching the Genesis Mission," and the Press Release "President Trump Launches the Genesis Mission to Accelerate AI for Scientific Discovery"

 

Pix credit here

All are Leninists now. 

Pix credit here (movie "Fight Club")

Leninism is now so deeply embedded in the premises of societal organization that it has simply disappeared from consciousness to become the basis for what now passes for collective consciousness itself. Everywhere.

This is neither bad nor good. It is, however, unavoidable in this stage of the historical development of liberal democracy it appears. 

Leninism, both as a word and as a theory of governance, as well as the modalities of the governance it theorizes, cannot be named. The first rule of Leninism, in whatever form it takes, is never talk about Leninism. And the more it is acknowledged the harder one works at erasing that acknowledgement. It has become a function of some of its expression--as Marxism, as authoritarianism, as Fascism (a unity of opposites?), and as brain trust supervisory liberal democracy. All them then share the fundamental feature of Leninism as a tech-based cognitive cage from out which social relations may be rationalized: a vanguard (however defined) is a necessary predicate for a stable social order the guidance and leadership of which is effectuated through the establishment of a dictatorship of leading forces.   

Perhaps it was inevitable. The inevitability was clear enough in 1918 with the collapse of the Russian Imperial then then sort of democratic machinery. But what was inevitable was not Marxist revolution. No. What was inevitable and initially feared was the overthrow of ancient forms of caste/hierarchies  masquerading as everything from theocracy to monarchies, oligarchies, aristocratic regimes and liberal democracy (all of which as Aristotle never tied of trying to explain to those who would not listen, or if they were listening were doing so strategically for their own advantage). That overthrow was not meant to produce something better. Well, maybe not exactly nothing better--it produced a more suitable discursive environment in which what came next, what was feared, could be insinuated into the bones of virtually every system of power then strong enough to thrive. It produced new forms of caste power, of modalities of leadership and guidance--better suited to the age of large first stage industrialization, and the foundations of systems that would, ultimately, be ideal for the merger of technology and control.

Pix credit here

What was feared in 1918 and thereafter was not Marxism, or the movement toward (eventually) the establishment of communist societies, the shock troops of which would be a motley collection of the poor and eventually collective identity collectives. Bismarck had shown the possibilities of suborning the poor and using them to buttress older systems; but then so did the Americans from a cleaner and more tech advanced perspective in the 19th century, especially after the destruction of the gentry plantation structures  and their replacement by the technologies of factory style human robotization of the later initial period of industrialization). Still, the Bolsheviks had demonstrated, again, both the frailty of old power orders, and the power of ideas to manage and use the poor (workers)--and the ambitious (intellectuals, for example). These, as always, could (and do) serve as the canon fodder to be deployed for this effort; these are the willing offerings of the necessary blood sacrifice , the horrors of which plays so well (discursively, of course) within societies whose members had already be primed to absorb the sacrifice with the appropriate cultural and value ordering premises, and so primed, and so motivated, would become the vehicles for the triumph of the new caste reordering for societies now primed toward the acceptance of that instrumental inevitability for the birth of new power orders that now appeared to be the antithesis of themselves.

What was feared enough to produce a quite brilliant reaction and fundamental change of course, was what eventually (and with a head nod to Rousseau) elaborated as a variety of forms of caste vanguardsm, one built around the pioneering work of Soviet professional revolutionaries. Vanguardism was quite correctly perceived as both threat and opportunity at least outside of the Bolshevik realms by those holding onto the cognitive premises around which power was arranged and could be deployed in whatever horrible way suited those whose hands never really got dirty, societal herdmasters; what was feared with the rise of the professional revolutionary, and with them, the arrangement of power within the forms and technologies of Leninism. Vanguardisms, and especially vanguards enhanced by and through technology, appears to offer the same threat--and the same possibilities--as did bourgeois  revolutionaries of the 17th and 18th centuries to those who had profited from centuries of technologies of power the decrepitude of which, enhanced by the blindness of arrogance and the "Forbidden City effect" of increasingly retreating into their fantasy pleasure spaces (discussed here; Forbidden Cities).

That the Soviet Leninist vanguard was able to topple the older regimes with what appeared to be the effort of a 10 year old blowing out birthday candles, suggested that while the Soviet form of Leninist vanguardism was a threat--the use of Leninist vanguardism was also an opportunity. It was an opportunity that could be refashioned to suit the political-economic models that were emerging in recognizable form by 1919. The Soviets, heading a more developmentally backward state (their word, similar with early Chinese Marxist-Leninist before the Japanese War), focused on class struggle. The rest, in a far ore advanced state of development (in the Chinese Leninist sense of modernization), focused on the utilization of the "brain trust" as the principle means of advancing a new (now Leninist) vanguard ruling group. 

Pix Credit Here (Movie, "Oh Brother Where Art Thou")

On that basis liberal democracy was able to lay the foundations of its approach to Leninist vanguardism to suit its stage of historical development, around which it consigned old power caste categories ( race, sex, birth, etc,) to the dust bin of history, while retaining its forms and structures of authority (of course) and raised up new technologies of governing, one based on the deployment of knowledge production as an instrument suited to the needs of those who "make the rules"--and the technological of the rule system itself, producing, in some respects a factory floor model of "law" and its "rule" that also became a function of the new power-laboring classes--the expert, the intellectual, and the well training official, all now the new shock troops of caste power manged through the mechanics of liberal democracy and guided by those with the power to manage knowledge production through the control of the resources necessary for its elaboration and the realization of tech and knowledge fueled "goals." That, in turn required a governance apparatus different from that necessary to control peasants and workers along a Socialist Path; it required an apparatus of the oxen of knowledge producers (well rewarded at their higher levels) pulling the cart of development toward values infused wealth (welfare) maximization, the forms and objectives of which have also been an object of brain trust development, for which purposes the State retained a critical importance as the holder of the authority to "make things happen." In that respect as well the difference between Soviet/Chinese Leninist pathways and those of liberal democracy converged as to form, at least. But it also required new means of in-taking human capital (merit, loyalty, patriotism, solidarity, etc., whatever works in context), and a new means of expressing the democratic character of the enterprise of aligned knowledge-power systems. A nice post-Bolshevik variant might be understood within the structures of the International Labor Organization--consisting of representation of workers, enterprises, and the state. Knowledge based consultative democracy is another, as is supervisory regulation, and other knowledge based mechanisms for deploying knowledge, including the knowledge of managing behaviors, sentiments, and the politics of those not sufficiently embedded in the mechanisms of knowledge-power-management. 

Pix credit here

And, of course, brain trusts plus technology--whether it is of intellectuals, of the leading forces of social development, or of anything else--answer only to themselves and their own logic. In the context of tech driven brain trust vanguardism of the liberal democratic sort one does not  encounter some sort of sad re-enactment of the cruder forms of totalitarianism of the last century. Though that false analogy appears to drive much of what passes for discussion and analysis among the fearful, the lazy, and those effectively out of the loop and not ready for tech based disciplinary "re-education." There is something new; it is new because the technologies are new, and with it, the approaches to understanding the "meaning" of core social collective premises become new as well. One moves from total control to total management; and one moves from a totalizing absence of personal liberty to its mediation by reference to public policy goals, aspirations, ideals and objectives.  Many global societies have been engaging in dress rehearsals for this new form of managed freedom and liberty for some time; and the politics of identity in the liberal democratic sphere, and that of patriotism and the avoidance of "chaos" have fueled the same control trajectories in Marxist Leninist States, to different effect in the ground. Brian trust vanguardism, like its post-Soviet Marxist cousin, manages and with technology, it may well manage so seamlessly that the difference between management and control will be a function of the determination of how much discretion left to humans  marks the diffe4rence between social solidarity principles and totalitarian disciplinary structures. In both cases, though, deviation from the vision and desires of the vanguard become harder as the politics of social collectives shifts from the masses to its leaders who manifest "the best of us." 

Pix credit here (Éminence Grise, Jean-Léon Gérôme (1873))

 The brain trust concept has become ubiquitous in liberal democracy, and so deeply embedded that it is now virtually impossible  to avoid the concept and its value as an inevitable solution to everything without rejecting the contemporary premises on which liberal democracy has been reordered since 1918. Consider this opening snippet from the Magazine of Columbia University: "Columbia’s Mind, Brain, and Behavior Initiative is assembling the best thinkers in the world to study the most complex object in the known universe." (The Brian Trust). One cannot imagine a world in which the brain trust is not a central element of power--aligning knowledge production with power, and the desires of power with knowledge production in a closed loop self-referencing structure within which one provides both tests who "for knows better" and then assumes that knowledge in the service of power  effectively trumps traditional politics either from the top, or more interesting, from the bottom. At the same time it aligns knowledge production with the production of law. Rule of law, in this sense, begins to assume the closed loop characteristics of productivity measures on the factory of floor of politics, directed now to the maximization of the realization of what expert knowledge--the brain trust, always eager to please those who make their new found status-power possible--makes possible. And the productivity of expert knowledge makes possible what power can conceive and desire. 

Pix Credit here (Cenerentola, Jean Pierre Ponnelle production, finale Act 1)

Tutti [All]
(meno Dandini) [except Dandini]
Andiamo, andiamo a tavola. [Come on; let's go to the table]
Si voli a giubilar. [Let's fly to rejoice in the feast]

Dandini
Oggi che fo da Principe [Today while I can still act the part of the Prince]
Per quattro io vuo' mangiar. [I will eat for four] (Cenerentola Finale Act 1)

The marriage is particular effective and visible in the context of tech and law making--as development and deployment according to rule grounded in the efforts of éminence grise yoked to that task. See, e.g., (1) U.N. Global Dialogue on Artificial Intelligence Offers Platform to Build Safe Systems and Open Call for Candidates: (2) Reflections on Brainstorming Roundtable Hosted by Surya Deva, UN Special Rapporteur for Development (29 Nov 2023): "business models for inclusive sustainable development". The United States has been no stranger to these trends, and in a sense has led them since before Lenin managed to articulate his version of revolutionary vanguardim in "What is to be Done?" (1901-02). This has emerged from out of the shadow win the new era of historical development of the Republic especially in the relationship between tech based innovation of productive forces and the role of the state in directing, managing, and guiding that development (Liberal Democratic Leninism in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Tech Driven Social Progress: Remarks by Director Kratsios at the Endless Frontiers Retreat and "The Golden Age of American Innovation"). 

In that consideration of the emerging US AI and tech policy there was an element of Chinese style modernization, and with it, the techniques and sensibilities of a revolutionary vanguard: 

6. The Structures of American Modernization. If, as Mr. Kratsios suggests, the American ideological operating system requires direction (its coders and quality control functionaries) , and that this direction is both collective and political, then analysis can narrow down to the precise expression of that guidance in any stage of national historical development. Here Mr. Kratsios gets down to some directional detail: 

"Our first assignment is to secure America’s preeminence in critical and emerging technologies. This administration will ensure that our nation remains the leader in the industries of the future with a strategy of both promotion and protection—protecting our greatest assets and promoting our greatest innovators. (Remarks by Director Kratsios)

Market driven innovation has political consequences, those consequences are the responsibility of the political hierarchy, the apex hierarchs have a responsibility for developing policy (mandatory and nudging) as a current expression and application of core principles bent toward the realization of ultimate goals. Here the political goal is to shape the market, and the direction of individual or private, activities within it, toward a metrics accessible (assuming agreement on the principles on which the metrics are based and the forms of measurement) goal--(1) preeminence, in (2) critical and emerging, (3) tech, (4) built around, (5)industries of the future, (6) through a national political strategy , (7) of promotion and protection, of (8) the critical factors of its production. It is in this objective that the failures of "left error" become most apparent to Mr. Kratsios:

To the degree it even tried to accomplish this, the Biden administration failed on its own terms, led by a spirit of fear rather than promise. The old regime sought to protect its managerial power from the disruptions of technology, while promoting social division and redistribution in the name of equity. They secured American technology poorly, and failed to strengthen our leadership at all. (Remarks by Director Kratsios)

To overcome this left error, Mr. Kratsios suggests, the state apparatus must be burdened with three responsibilities:  

First, we have to make the smart choices of creatively allocating our public research and development dollars. Second, we have to make the right choices in constructing a common-sense, pro-innovation regulatory regime. And third, we have to make the easy choice to adopt the incredible products and tools made by American builders and to enable their export abroad. (Remarks by Director Kratsios)

Strategic use of research funds by the state, high quality innovation in regulatory regimes bent toward the fulfillment of policy goals, and then the aggressive export f the products of this model elsewhere (both the model of innovation and its products). These then suggest a large range of recent actions undertaken by the Trump administration against officials, institutions, and intergovernmental relations that are viewed as either remnants of left error or that are in the way of the state  undertaking these strategies as they understand them. Mr. Kratsios summarizes with respect to these three State objectives what has already been widely reported in the press: taking back and re-arranging State research funding to align with State objectives; regulatory reform also tied to State objectives and the rectification of the techno-bureaucratic establishment so that its working style will align with State objectives; and the re-invigoration of a re-imaged 19th century form of American merchant diplomacy and integrated economic order. (Liberal Democratic Leninism in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Tech Driven Social Progress)

Pix Credit here (Columbia "Brain Trust")

 

The project now continues. On 24 November, President Trump issued a Press Release: President Trump Launches the Genesis Mission to Accelerate AI for Scientific Discovery. The Genesis Mission Press Relase described an earlier issued Executive Order: Launching the Genesis Mission.

The announcement builds on President Trump’s Executive Order Removing Barriers to American Leadership In Artificial Intelligence and advances his America’s AI Action Plan released earlier this year—a directive to remove barriers to innovation, reduce dependence on foreign adversaries, and unleash the full strength of America’s scientific enterprise. Secretary Wright has designated Under Secretary for Science Darío Gil to lead the initiative. The Genesis Mission will mobilize the Department of Energy’s 17 National Laboratories, industry, and academia to build an integrated discovery platform.  The platform will connect the world’s best supercomputers, AI systems, and next-generation quantum systems with the most advanced scientific instruments in the nation. Once complete, the platform will be the world’s most complex and powerful scientific instrument ever built. It will draw on the expertise of roughly 40,000 DOE scientists, engineers, and technical staff, alongside private sector innovators, to ensure that the United States leads and builds the technologies that will define the future. (Energy Department Launches ‘Genesis Mission’ to Transform American Science and Innovation Through the AI Computing Revolution)

 The Executive Order describes the project as "a national effort to accelerate the application of AI for transformative scientific discovery focused on pressing national challenges." (Launching the Genesis Mission, §2(a)). 

[It] recognizes the need to invest in AI-enabled science to accelerate scientific advancement. In this pivotal moment, the challenges we face require a historic national effort, comparable in urgency and ambition to the Manhattan Project that was instrumental to our victory in World War II and was a critical basis for the foundation of the Department of Energy (DOE) and its national laboratories. (Ibid., §1)

Pix credit here (the adversary)

It is meant to harness the best minds toward objectives that strengthen the Republic as that is understood by those in power in a State directed project that harnesses national productive forces toward those ends: "The Genesis Mission will dramatically accelerate scientific discovery, strengthen national security, secure energy dominance, enhance workforce productivity, and multiply the return on taxpayer investment into research and development, thereby furthering America’s technological dominance and global strategic leadership." (Ibid., § 1). All of this is to be overseen by the core of leadership in (or of) the Republic, Michael Kratsios the "Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST) [who] shall provide general leadership of the Mission." (Ibid., § 2(c)) and operationalized under the leadership of the Secretary of Energy (Ibid., §2(b). And it object--not merely to ensure the accelerated movement of the Republic's tech innovation forward, but to do so in a way that protects the Republic against these forces of internal chaos and external threat. This ties back to the Trump Administration objectives of moving toward a new golden age--the Republic's analogue to the Chinese Marxist-Leninist objectives of socialist modernization as an instrument essential to the project of national rejuvenation. 

No fault here. But also a very nice sign both of the deep penetration of Leninist vanguardism as an essential element of techno-liberal democracy and with it the way in which the State, even in markets driven cultures, may deploy national productive forces, including human productive elements to suit its purposes, purposes that are manifested and realized through an interaction between knowledge producers and power holders. Perhaps left in its wake, and perhaps necessarily so, are the discursive ropes that once served to animate the Republic's sense of itself, even as it was changing from 1919. 

And what is the measure of success? Victory!

But there is no substitute for victory. ** * In a world so shaped by politics as well as technology, we must take action in both of these domains. We need all Americans to continue to rise to the occasion, to make full use of their talents, and to build. (Ibid.)

To those ends the masses must unite under the leadership and guidance of the center to ensure that individual effort can be aggregated, in the fundamental working style of American markets driven organization, to "preserve the inheritance of the American Century to share with posterity, and to ensure that the technologies that give shape to our world help the American people secure the blessings of liberty we received from our forebearers * * * and drive us further into the endless frontier." (Remarks by Director Kratsios). (Liberal Democratic Leninism in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Tech Driven Social Progress)

 To those ends, the American Science and Security Platform (Platform) will be developed. It will serve as "the infrastructure for the Mission with the purpose of providing, in an integrated manner and to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with law" (Ibid., § 3(a)) with the following capabilities:

(i) high-performance computing resources, including DOE national laboratory supercomputers and secure cloud-based AI computing environments, capable of supporting large-scale model training, simulation, and inference;

(ii) AI modeling and analysis frameworks, including AI agents to explore design spaces, evaluate experimental outcomes, and automate workflows;

(iii) computational tools, including AI-enabled predictive models, simulation models, and design optimization tools;

(iv) domain-specific foundation models across the range of scientific domains covered;

(v) secure access to appropriate datasets, including proprietary, federally curated, and open scientific datasets, in addition to synthetic data generated through DOE computing resources, consistent with applicable law; applicable classification, privacy, and intellectual property protections; and Federal data-access and data-management standards; and

(vi) experimental and production tools to enable autonomous and AI-augmented experimentation and manufacturing in high-impact domains.

To what ends? Within 60 days of the date of the order, the Energy Secretary and their staff is to "identify and submit to" Mr. Kratsios, the APST, "a detailed list of at least 20 science and technology challenges of national importance" what might be fodder for the Platform created under § 3. These are to "span priority domains consistent with National Science and Technology Memorandum 2 of September 23, 2025." (Launching the Genesis Mission, §4(a)). These are to include: "(i) advanced manufacturing; (ii) biotechnology; (iii) critical materials; (iv) nuclear fission and fusion energy; (v) quantum information science; and (vi) semiconductors and microelectronics.

In this project, the State is also to serve a coordinating and amplification role.  

The Secretary, in coordination with the APST and the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto, shall establish mechanisms for agency collaboration with external partners possessing advanced AI, data, or computing capabilities or scientific domain expertise, including through cooperative research and development agreements, user facility partnerships, or other appropriate arrangements with external entities to support and enhance the activities of the Mission, and shall ensure that such partnerships are structured to preserve the security of Federal research assets and maximize public benefit.(Launching the Genesis Mission, §5(c)).

This, then, is how liberal democratic techno-brain trust-vanguardism works at the start of the second quarter of this century, and in the process re-shapes the Republic. Make no mistake, this is not a partisan project but rather one that the Republic's leadership has been working towards for more than a century. It aligns with the times and with the Republic's political economic model n a form relevant to the contradictions that threaten its forward movement along the American progressive pathway. In this form, the Republic's Leninism, long in gestation and dedicated to countering and overcoming the threat of Soviet Marxist class struggle Leninist vanguardism, now appears to assume a more prominent and coordinating role, a role of leadership and guidance over non-state productive forces, and in the name of national security and the safeguarding of the State from instability and chaos to assume a larger role in the management of non-state assets and the autonomous decision making of individuals that are its subjects. In the process both the nature and practice of brain trust liberal democracy and the relationship between individuals, the state and its law changes to suit the times. 

And one of its great markers--the abandonment of the risk avoidance foundational premises underlying both the United Nations and European approaches to Artificial Intelligence. In that one sees that second dialectic, between law and technology, in which knowledge production and the needs of one drives and tends to shape the approach of the other. In the case of the United Nations and European éminences grise, knowledge production is grounded in risk avoidance which is then tied to and informed against a reading of constitutional traditions that serve to shape the nature and limits of that production (and use) of knowledge. In the case of the United States, the Leninist brain trust shapes law to facilitate a production of knowledge in the service of other identified fundamental challenges, one which reshapes and devalues risk as a constitutional (and therefore legal) value in shaping the law of high quality production in the service of the State, and from the State to the private sector.  

Both President Trump's Executive Order, Launching the Genesis Mission, and his Press Release on the Genesis Mission, President Trump Launches the Genesis Mission to Accelerate AI for Scientific Discovery, follows below. Make of it what you will from and through whatever cognitive lens suits. 

Pix credit here

 All of this, as interesting as it might be, leaves unanswered, and perhaps unanswerable, the critical question: how does the vanguard govern itself? The Chinese as children of the Soviet experiment offer us democratic centralism, normative objectivity, dictatorship of proletariat, and the mass line. It is not clear how liberal democratic vanguard forces mean to govern themselves and remain true to the foundational premises of the Republic (whether undertaken by either of the two currently principal political establishments).

President Trump Launches the Genesis Mission to Accelerate AI for Scientific Discovery

The White House

November 24, 2025

Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order launching The Genesis Mission, a bold national initiative that aims to accelerate scientific breakthroughs using AI. Inspired by the legacy of the Apollo Program, The Genesis Mission brings together the unmatched power of our National Laboratories’ supercomputers and top scientific minds to transform the way science and research are conducted.

This whole-of-government approach represents a historic mobilization of resources, tasking the Department of Energy to integrate its world-class supercomputers and datasets into a unified, closed-loop AI platform. Integrating this data, The Genesis Mission leverages the power of AI to automate experiment design, accelerate simulations, and generate predictive models that accelerate federal research and development productivity.

The Executive Order directs the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology to spearhead coordination with key federal agencies, including the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and National Institutes of Health (NIH) as AI unlocks scientific findings from datasets spanning from energy, health, and manufacturing.

“President Trump is taking a revolutionary approach to scientific research, harnessing the power of AI to propel America into the Golden Age of Innovation. The Genesis Mission connects world-class scientific data with the most advanced American AI to unlock breakthroughs in medicine, energy, materials science, and beyond,” said Michael Kratsios, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the White House of Science and Technology Policy.

 

LAUNCHING THE GENESIS MISSION

Executive Orders

November 24, 2025

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Purpose.  From the founding of our Republic, scientific discovery and technological innovation have driven American progress and prosperity.  Today, America is in a race for global technology dominance in the development of artificial intelligence (AI), an important frontier of scientific discovery and economic growth.  To that end, my Administration has taken a number of actions to win that race, including issuing multiple Executive Orders and implementing America’s AI Action Plan, which recognizes the need to invest in AI-enabled science to accelerate scientific advancement.  In this pivotal moment, the challenges we face require a historic national effort, comparable in urgency and ambition to the Manhattan Project that was instrumental to our victory in World War II and was a critical basis for the foundation of the Department of Energy (DOE) and its national laboratories.

This order launches the “Genesis Mission” as a dedicated, coordinated national effort to unleash a new age of AI‑accelerated innovation and discovery that can solve the most challenging problems of this century.  The Genesis Mission will build an integrated AI platform to harness Federal scientific datasets — the world’s largest collection of such datasets, developed over decades of Federal investments — to train scientific foundation models and create AI agents to test new hypotheses, automate research workflows, and accelerate scientific breakthroughs.  The Genesis Mission will bring together our Nation’s research and development resources — combining the efforts of brilliant American scientists, including those at our national laboratories, with pioneering American businesses; world-renowned universities; and existing research infrastructure, data repositories, production plants, and national security sites — to achieve dramatic acceleration in AI development and utilization.  We will harness for the benefit of our Nation the revolution underway in computing, and build on decades of innovation in semiconductors and high-performance computing.  The Genesis Mission will dramatically accelerate scientific discovery, strengthen national security, secure energy dominance, enhance workforce productivity, and multiply the return on taxpayer investment into research and development, thereby furthering America’s technological dominance and global strategic leadership.

Sec. 2.  Establishment of the Genesis Mission.  (a)  There is hereby established the Genesis Mission (Mission), a national effort to accelerate the application of AI for transformative scientific discovery focused on pressing national challenges.

(b)  The Secretary of Energy (Secretary) shall be responsible for implementing the Mission within DOE, consistent with the provisions of this order, including, as appropriate and authorized by law, setting priorities and ensuring that all DOE resources used for elements of the Mission are integrated into a secure, unified platform.  The Secretary may designate a senior political appointee to oversee day-to-day operations of the Mission.

(c)  The Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST) shall provide general leadership of the Mission, including coordination of participating executive departments and agencies (agencies) through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and the issuance of guidance to ensure that the Mission is aligned with national objectives.

Sec. 3.  Operation of the American Science and Security Platform.  (a)  The Secretary shall establish and operate the American Science and Security Platform (Platform) to serve as the infrastructure for the Mission with the purpose of providing, in an integrated manner and to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with law:

(i)    high-performance computing resources, including DOE national laboratory supercomputers and secure cloud-based AI computing environments, capable of supporting large-scale model training, simulation, and inference;

(ii)   AI modeling and analysis frameworks, including AI agents to explore design spaces, evaluate experimental outcomes, and automate workflows;

(iii)  computational tools, including AI-enabled predictive models, simulation models, and design optimization tools;

(iv)   domain-specific foundation models across the range of scientific domains covered;

(v)    secure access to appropriate datasets, including proprietary, federally curated, and open scientific datasets, in addition to synthetic data generated through DOE computing resources, consistent with applicable law; applicable classification, privacy, and intellectual property protections; and Federal data-access and data-management standards; and

(vi)   experimental and production tools to enable autonomous and AI-augmented experimentation and manufacturing in high-impact domains.

(b)  The Secretary shall take necessary steps to ensure that the Platform is operated in a manner that meets security requirements consistent with its national security and competitiveness mission, including applicable classification, supply chain security, and Federal cybersecurity standards and best practices.

(c)  Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall identify Federal computing, storage, and networking resources available to support the Mission, including both DOE on-premises and cloud-based high-performance computing systems, and resources available through industry partners.  The Secretary shall also identify any additional partnerships or infrastructure enhancements that could support the computational foundation for the Platform.

(d)  Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall:

(i)   identify a set of initial data and model assets for use in the Mission, including digitization, standardization, metadata, and provenance tracking; and

(ii)  develop a plan, with appropriate risk-based cybersecurity measures, for incorporating datasets from federally funded research, other agencies, academic institutions, and approved private-sector partners, as appropriate.

(e)  Within 240 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall review capabilities across the DOE national laboratories and other participating Federal research facilities for robotic laboratories and production facilities with the ability to engage in AI-directed experimentation and manufacturing, including automated and AI-augmented workflows and the related technical and operational standards needed.

(f)  Within 270 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall, consistent with applicable law and subject to available appropriations, seek to demonstrate an initial operating capability of the Platform for at least one of the national science and technology challenges identified pursuant to section 4 of this order.

Sec. 4.  Identification of National Science and Technology Challenges.  (a)  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary shall identify and submit to the APST a detailed list of at least 20 science and technology challenges of national importance that the Secretary assesses to have potential to be addressed through the Mission and that span priority domains consistent with National Science and Technology Memorandum 2 of September 23, 2025, including:

(i)    advanced manufacturing;

(ii)   biotechnology;

(iii)  critical materials;

(iv)   nuclear fission and fusion energy;

(v)    quantum information science; and

(vi)   semiconductors and microelectronics.

(b)  Within 30 days of submission of the list described in subsection (a) of this section, the APST shall review the proposed list and, working with participating agency members of the NSTC, coordinate the development of an expanded list that can serve as the initial set of national science and technology challenges to be addressed by the Mission, including additional challenges proposed by participating agencies through the NSTC, subject to available appropriations.

(c)  Following development of the expanded list described in subsection (b) of this section, agencies participating in the Mission shall use the Platform to advance research and development aligned with the national science and technology challenges identified in the expanded list, consistent with applicable law and their respective missions, and subject to available appropriations.

(d)  On an annual basis thereafter, the Secretary shall review and update the list of challenges in consultation with the APST and the NSTC to reflect progress achieved, emerging national needs, and alignment with my Administration’s research and development priorities.

Sec. 5.  Interagency Coordination and External Engagement.  (a)  The APST, through the NSTC, and with support from the Federal Chief Data Officer Council and the Chief AI Officer Council, shall convene relevant and interested agencies to:

(i)    assist participating agencies in aligning, to the extent permitted by law, their AI-related programs, datasets, and research and development activities with the objectives of the Mission in their respective areas of expertise, while avoiding duplication of effort across the Federal Government and promoting interoperability;

(ii)   identify data sources that may support the Mission’s aim;

(iii)  develop a process and resourcing plan in coordination with participating agencies for integrating appropriate and available agency data and infrastructure into the Mission, to the extent permitted by law and subject to available appropriations, including methods under which all agencies contributing to the Mission are encouraged to implement appropriate risk-based security measures that reflect cybersecurity best practices;

(iv)   launch coordinated funding opportunities or prize competitions across participating agencies, to the extent permitted by law and subject to available appropriations, to incentivize private-sector participation in AI-driven scientific research aligned with Mission objectives; and

(v)    establish mechanisms to coordinate research and development funding opportunities and experimental resources across participating agencies, ensuring agencies can participate effectively in the Mission.

(b)  The APST shall coordinate with relevant agencies in establishing, consistent with existing authorizing statutes and subject to available appropriations, competitive programs for research fellowships, internships, and apprenticeships focused on the application of AI to scientific domains identified as national challenges for the Mission, to include placement of program participants at DOE national laboratories and other participating Federal research facilities, with the purpose of providing access to the Platform and training in AI-enabled scientific discovery.

(c)  The Secretary, in coordination with the APST and the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto, shall establish mechanisms for agency collaboration with external partners possessing advanced AI, data, or computing capabilities or scientific domain expertise, including through cooperative research and development agreements, user facility partnerships, or other appropriate arrangements with external entities to support and enhance the activities of the Mission, and shall ensure that such partnerships are structured to preserve the security of Federal research assets and maximize public benefit.  To facilitate these collaborations, the Secretary shall:

(i)    develop standardized partnership frameworks, including cooperative research and development or other appropriate agreements, and data-use and model‑sharing agreements;

(ii)   establish clear policies for ownership, licensing, trade-secret protections, and commercialization of intellectual property developed under the Mission, including innovations arising from AI-directed experiments;

(iii)  implement uniform and stringent data access and management processes and cybersecurity standards for non-Federal collaborators accessing datasets, models, and computing environments, including measures requiring compliance with classification, privacy, and export-control requirements, as well as other applicable laws; and

(iv)   establish procedures to ensure the highest standards of vetting and authorization of users and collaborators seeking access to the resources of the Mission and associated research activities, including the Platform and associated Federal research resources.

(d)  The APST, through the NSTC, shall, to the extent appropriate, identify opportunities for international scientific collaboration to support activities under the Mission.

Sec. 6.  Evaluation and Reporting.  (a)  Within 1 year of the date of this order, and on an annual basis thereafter, the Secretary shall submit a report to the President, through the APST and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, describing:

(i)    the Platform’s operational status and capabilities;

(ii)   progress toward integration across DOE national laboratories and other participating Federal research partners, including shared access to computing resources, data infrastructure, and research facilities;

(iii)  the status of user engagement, including participation of student researchers and any related training;

(iv)   updates on research efforts and outcomes achieved, including measurable scientific advances, publications, and prototype technologies;

(v)    the scope and outcomes of public-private partnerships, including collaborative research projects and any technology transitions or commercialization activities; and

(vi)   any identified needs or recommendations for authorities or interagency support to achieve the Mission’s objectives.

Sec. 7.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The costs for publication of this order shall be borne by the Department of Energy.

                             DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,

    November 24, 2025.