Political and tech industry leaders attend a White House meeting on “Super Intelligence” on September 29.
Donald Trump has so far pursued a clear approach to artificial intelligence: maximum speed, minimum regulation: another technology slowed down by regulation. Now the White House is creating a task force to examine precisely what risks the technology poses and what responsibility the federal government should assume. The “Super Intelligence Force” will be led by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton and has 120 days to deliver its report. The structure reveals Washington’s growing dilemma: America wants to move faster than its rivals in AI – without losing control of what it creates along the way.
The intelligence chief becomes the AI czar
Clayton has led the US intelligence community since August. He is now taking on another role.
According to the Wall Street Journal, he will chair the new White House task force, effectively becoming the administration’s central AI coordinator.
Its mandate goes beyond a general review of the technology.
The group will examine the risks and opportunities created by advanced AI, review existing government mechanisms for reporting breaches, hacks and other incidents, and recommend ways for federal agencies to strengthen their response under existing authorities.
Clayton’s rationale, however, does not follow the traditional logic of a regulatory agency.
His central warning is about the risk of America failing to remain first.
That is the political core of the initiative.
For the Trump administration, security and technological dominance are not opposing objectives. Washington increasingly argues that falling behind – particularly behind China – would itself create national security risks.
A task force built around the centres of power
Its membership reinforces that ambition.
The three vice chairs will include Emil Michael from the Defense Department, Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor and Federal Trade Commission Chair Andrew Ferguson.
Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles are also expected to participate.
External advisers include former AI adviser David Sacks and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
This is therefore not simply a committee of technology or security officials.
Defense, economic policy, competition enforcement, government personnel and the White House itself are being brought together.
AI has effectively become a cross-government instrument of American power policy.
Trump now calls AI “Super Intelligence”
Even the task force’s name is political.
At the end of September, Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies, wherever legally possible, to replace the term “Artificial Intelligence” with “Super Intelligence.”
The administration argues that today’s systems increasingly exceed traditional ideas of artificial intelligence and represent extraordinary opportunities for the United States.
The change does not immediately alter the technology’s underlying legal definition.
Politically, however, the message is unmistakable.
Washington wants the technology associated primarily with progress, opportunity and American leadership – rather than danger, automation or loss of control.
Only days later, the same administration is establishing a task force specifically designed to investigate the risks surrounding that technology.
It is not a reversal.
But it is a notable addition to Trump’s previous approach.
Big Tech is still expected to police itself
Trump is simultaneously holding on to his preference for limited regulation.
Days before the task force became public, he met senior executives from Nvidia, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, Google and other major technology companies at the White House.
Six leading AI companies signed a voluntary set of safety commitments.
They include internal controls, monitoring of powerful models and independent external audits.
Trump described the agreement as morally binding.
Legally, it is not.
There are no defined penalties if companies fail to comply, and much of the detail surrounding outside auditing remains under corporate control.
The administration’s fundamental model therefore remains intact: industry drives innovation and largely polices itself, while government monitors developments, coordinates responses and relies mainly on existing legal powers.
The risks are becoming harder to ignore
Why create a task force now?
One reason is that public concern about AI has intensified sharply in the United States.
A Reuters/Ipsos poll in September found that three quarters of Americans worry AI companies are not doing enough to prevent serious harm to society.
Real security incidents and increasingly stark warnings from within the industry have added to that anxiety.
Advanced AI agents have already demonstrated unpredictable behaviour in complex technical environments. Researchers and former employees at major AI companies are also raising concerns about cyberattacks, autonomous systems and increasingly capable models.
Lawmakers from both parties have responded with growing calls for stronger oversight.
That creates a political problem for Trump.
He does not want extensive regulation to slow the technology down. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to leave its risks entirely to the companies building it.
The new task force is an attempt to resolve precisely that tension.
China remains the central argument against regulation
Trump’s resistance to binding AI rules has one overriding geopolitical reference point: China.
The administration has repeatedly argued that heavier regulatory burdens could weaken US companies in the global technology race.
In June, Trump already ordered the national security apparatus to accelerate its adoption of advanced AI.
The military and intelligence agencies are supposed to gain rapid access to powerful commercial and open-source models, while ensuring those systems remain secure, controllable and resistant to manipulation.
The logic is the same as that behind the new task force.
America does not intend to reduce risk by developing more slowly.
It wants to manage the risk while developing faster than everyone else.
Whether that can actually be done remains the unresolved question.
Oversight without hitting the brakes
The Super Intelligence Force initially has 120 days.
After that, its work could be extended, transferred to an existing agency or form the basis for new executive or legislative measures.
Nothing so far suggests that Washington has decided to introduce comprehensive new AI regulation.
The opposite may be more likely.
The administration appears to be trying first to coordinate existing government powers more effectively without building a new regulatory architecture.
That is precisely what makes the task force politically significant.
Trump is effectively acknowledging that artificial intelligence can no longer be treated solely as an innovation and growth story.
Cybersecurity, national security, critical infrastructure and broader societal risks are pulling the state into a role that goes beyond simply encouraging investment.
Yet the American AI strategy remains fundamentally built around speed.
The key question over the next 120 days is therefore not whether Washington wants to slow AI development.
It is whether a technology becoming more autonomous and powerful can genuinely be brought under closer supervision while the race to build it continues to accelerate.
