Conference Agenda

The United States maintains two largely separate spectrum governance regimes: one oriented toward national security and military operational requirements, and another oriented toward commercial communications, competition, and innovation. This institutional division reflects legitimate differences in mission, but it increasingly creates coordination failures as military capabilities become dependent on commercially developed communications technologies and as commercial wireless networks assume greater importance to national security. This paper examines whether the continued separation of military and commercial spectrum governance remains optimal in an era of dual-use technology and strategic competition.

Through historical and comparative institutional analysis, the paper examines the evolution of United States spectrum governance and compares it with approaches in China, India, the Nordic countries, and Ukraine. The analysis finds that the United States retains comparatively substantial federal incumbency in commercially valuable low- and mid-band spectrum, while other countries have increasingly prioritized commercial deployment while preserving protected spectrum for essential military functions. The comparison does not demonstrate that any one allocation of spectrum is universally optimal. Rather, it reveals different institutional approaches to balancing assured military access with commercial scale, investment, and technological innovation.

The paper argues for a commercial-first spectrum doctrine based on a tiered allocation principle. Commercial International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) and Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) ecosystems should serve as the primary innovation platform for portable communications, with the Department of War acting increasingly as an anchor customer through procurement, security requirements, priority access, and network architecture. Military primacy should remain for non-portable functions for which assured exclusive access is indispensable, including critical radar, electronic warfare, and Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) capabilities. Such a doctrine would preserve military superiority while allowing commercial scale and market competition to become strategic assets rather than separate domains.