With the participation of 24 tech giants, what are the ambitions of the US "Genesis Project"?

Behind the "Genesis Mission" lies the United States' ambition to maintain its global economic dominance through technology.

On November 24, 2025, Donald Trump officially signed an executive order at the White House, launching the "Genesis Mission" (The Genesis Mission), which is known as the "AI version of the Manhattan Project" by the outside world.

The term "Genesis" is derived from the Bible. Trump's choice of this name for this national - level AI mission shows his high expectations. This is not an isolated policy outburst but an inevitable outcome of the global technological competition entering a critical stage.

Today, AI technology has moved from the laboratory to the core of industries and has become a key force in reshaping the global industrial and value chains. The global technological competition has also shifted from single - point technological breakthroughs to systematic capability confrontation.

Therefore, the emergence of the "Genesis Mission" is not only a strategic response of the United States to the changing global technological landscape, implicitly containing a deeper ambition to dominate the future global technological governance rules, but also regarded as a landmark event in the transformation of its science and technology policy from "laissez - faire" to "mission - oriented" state capitalism.

For China, this plan not only brings external pressure of technological blockade but also provides a reference for observing the technological strategic layout of major powers. How to actively respond to this smokeless competition while maintaining an open and cooperative attitude and building a sustainable innovation ecosystem has become an urgent issue that requires in - depth thinking at present.

1

The Logic Behind the Birth of the Genesis Mission

The implementation of the Genesis Mission did not come out of thin air but is deeply rooted in the strategic tradition of "crisis - driven" in the scientific and technological development of the United States.

Looking back at history, there are early precedents for the situation in the U.S. scientific and technological community of "uniting in the face of crisis": During the Cold War, in the face of the Soviet Union's leading edge in the space field, the "Apollo Program" emerged. It not only accomplished the feat of manned lunar landing but also drove the explosion of a series of related industries such as semiconductors and new materials, becoming a model of using national power to promote technological revolution.

Obviously, this scientific and technological innovation model of "national will + concentrated resources" has become the core path for the United States to break through in key fields. The Genesis Mission is the continuation and upgrade of this tradition in the AI era and an important part of the major - power game.

In the view of the United States, China's progress in key scientific and technological fields in recent years has far exceeded expectations: On the one hand, the implementation speed of China's large - scale AI models is rapid. Especially in practical scenarios such as industrial quality inspection and new drug research and development, enterprises have integrated AI into the core processes, achieving several - fold increases in efficiency. On the other hand, the process of self - sufficiency in the semiconductor industry chain is advancing steadily. From chip design to manufacturing and packaging, China is gradually breaking its external technological dependence.

More importantly, the differences in the innovation paths between China and the United States have further magnified the United States' anxiety. Relying on the whole - nation system, China can quickly integrate cross - departmental and cross - regional resources and focus on key areas to achieve concentrated breakthroughs. In contrast, the United States is deeply trapped in the fragmented dilemma of regulatory barriers among states and interest games among technology giants, and its scientific research resources are scattered across different systems and difficult to form a joint force.

The pressure of external competition has made the internal contradictions of the U.S. scientific research system more prominent. From 2010 to 2020, the average annual growth rate of the number of new drugs approved by the FDA was less than 3%, and the efficiency of scientific research output continued to decline. In the semiconductor field, although the United States has high - end design tools, its manufacturing process is highly dependent on East Asian production capacity, resulting in the embarrassing situation of "harming oneself while harming the enemy" in the technological blockade against China.

The more core problem is the serious phenomenon of "inverted input - output": The number of scientific research personnel has doubled year by year, but the growth rate of achievements has decreased by 30%. Even the U.S. Department of Energy's national laboratories, which hold the world's largest scientific research data resources, cannot fully transform the innovation impetus due to the "data silo" problem, dragging down the progress of many projects.

It is worth mentioning that the Genesis Mission is not a brand - new idea of the Trump administration but is a refinement and extension of the "U.S. AI Action Plan" released by the White House in July 2025.

The plan clearly stated that the entire U.S. AI field should "eliminate innovation barriers, reduce external dependence, and unleash scientific power." The Genesis Mission is to translate the core idea of "investing in AI - empowered scientific research" into specific and implementable actions.

Meanwhile, the concept of "creative monopoly" put forward by Silicon Valley capital tycoons such as Peter Thiel coincides with the power - politics logic of the Trump administration.

Thiel advocates that enterprises should open up new fields through fundamental innovation rather than engaging in homogeneous competition in the existing market. When extended to the national level, this concept means trying to use national power to break the barriers of scattered resources, deeply integrate federal data, super - computing resources, and the technological capabilities of technology giants, and reconstruct the innovation system in the AI era.

It can be said that Trump's naming of the plan as "Genesis" not only reflects high expectations but also implies the ambition to reshape the world rules through technology.

However, a grand strategic vision ultimately needs a specific implementation framework. Especially for a "super - plan" that needs to integrate 100PB of federal data, mobilize 40,000 scientific research personnel, and link 17 national laboratories and dozens of technology giants, without a clear architectural design, clear division of rights and responsibilities, and a compact implementation rhythm, everything will be in vain.

Therefore, planning a targeted core architecture, division of rights and responsibilities, and a detailed implementation system has become the key idea for the United States to reshape the innovation landscape in the AI era.

2

The Implementation Blueprint of the Genesis Mission

To achieve the goal of "reconstructing the AI innovation system," the Genesis Mission has established an implementation framework centered on the "American Science and Security Platform" (American Science and Security Platform).

In terms of nature, the urgency and ambition of this mission are comparable to those of the "Manhattan Project" back then. The core idea is to bring together the powerful computing power of the U.S. national laboratories' super - computers and the wisdom of top - notch scientists to completely transform the way scientific research is conducted.

According to the planning of the executive order, the platform will, to the greatest extent permitted by law, integrate and provide six core supports - high - performance computing resources, AI modeling and analysis frameworks, computing tools, domain - specific foundation models, access to secure data sets, and experimental and production tools - to lay a solid technological foundation for the progress of the plan.

The integration of core resources focuses on four key dimensions to ensure the efficient collaboration of elements: First, the integration of federal scientific data sets, gathering more than 100PB of high - quality data accumulated over decades by the Department of Energy, the Meteorological Bureau, biological laboratories, etc., and managing them in three categories of "open scientific research, proprietary projects, and national security" to balance the needs of scientific research freedom and security. Second, the construction of super - computing clusters, integrating the super - computing resources such as "Frontier" and "Aurora" of the Department of Energy's national laboratories, cloud - based AI computing power pools, and resources of industry partners, which is sufficient to support large - scale model training, simulation, and inference. Third, the AI agent system, which undertakes the entire process of literature analysis, hypothesis formulation, experimental design, etc. through automated programs, verifies new hypotheses, automates the research process, and accelerates scientific breakthroughs. Fourth, the network of robotic laboratories, which combines automated experimental equipment and 3D printing technology to create an "unmanned scientific research" ecosystem, enabling autonomous and AI - enhanced experiments and manufacturing.

In terms of organizational structure, the executive order clearly defines the division of rights and responsibilities: The Secretary of Energy (DOE) is responsible for implementing the mission within the department, setting priorities, integrating resources, and appointing senior politically - appointed officials to supervise daily operations; the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology (APST) is responsible for overall leadership, coordinating participating departments and agencies through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to ensure that the mission is consistent with national goals.

According to public reports, Dario Gil, the Deputy Secretary of Energy, will lead the plan as the director of the "Genesis Mission" and can mobilize the forces of 17 national laboratories, the industrial community, and the academic community to build a comprehensive data platform.

After the platform is built, it will connect the world's top super - computers, artificial intelligence systems, next - generation quantum systems, and the most advanced scientific instruments in the United States, becoming the most complex and powerful scientific instrument in the world ever.

To speed up the progress, the United States has set a very compact schedule, fully reflecting the efficient "mission - oriented" thinking: Within 60 days after the project is launched, 20 national - level scientific and technological challenges will be identified; within 90 days, the computing, storage, and network resources will be inventoried; within 120 days, the initial data and model assets will be identified and optimized; within 240 days, laboratories with AI - automated research capabilities will be screened; within 270 days, the initial operational capabilities of at least one challenge will be demonstrated, and the challenge list will be updated annually thereafter.

In addition, the plan precisely focuses on the core nodes of the global industrial chain and strictly follows the six priority areas of the "National Science and Technology Memorandum No. 2," including advanced manufacturing, biotechnology, critical minerals/materials, nuclear fission and fusion energy, quantum information science, semiconductors, and microelectronics.

The cooperation between the government and enterprises and the linkage with allies are important supports for the implementation of the plan. The executive order has clearly proposed to significantly increase public - private cooperation in the field of AI development and deeply integrate with external entities in areas such as R & D agreements and user facility partnerships.

Currently, 24 technology giants such as NVIDIA, OpenAI, Google, and Dell have clearly participated. Among them, NVIDIA will cooperate with the Department of Energy to develop seven AI super - computers, Oracle is responsible for building the data platform, and Amazon has even promised to invest $50 billion in building AI and super - computing infrastructure to support government agencies; ally capitals such as the Saudi sovereign wealth fund have also injected funds through the "Arabian Peninsula AI Super - computing Corridor," forming a technology ecosystem of "U.S. leadership and ally participation."

In terms of strategic value, the Genesis Mission has gone beyond the scope of single - point technological breakthroughs and has become an important strategic plan for the United States to reshape the global scientific and technological industrial power structure, consolidate its technological dominance, and global influence.

3

The Signal of Reconstructing the Technological Landscape

The core goal of the Genesis Mission is to fully empower scientific research and the industrial system through AI, reshape the global technological power structure, and consolidate the United States' technological dominance and global strategic leadership.

Therefore, the scientific research paradigm change promoted by the Trump administration is just a superficial phenomenon. The deeper intention is to enable traditional industries such as manufacturing and energy to regain global pricing power and systematically solve domestic development problems such as industrial hollowing - out and slowdown in innovation efficiency.

This logic is in line with the "value network construction" advocated by Peter Thiel. In essence, they both aim to form an irreplaceable monopoly advantage through cross - domain collaboration.

For the United States itself, if the plan is successfully advanced, it will bring multiple benefits: First, the scientific research efficiency will be revolutionarily improved, and the R & D model will shift from "human - led and machine - assisted" to "AI - led and human - supervised." Second, AI will empower key industries such as manufacturing and energy, which is expected to systematically enhance industrial competitiveness, increase labor productivity, and create high - value - added jobs. Third, the technological advantage will directly strengthen national security capabilities, forming a virtuous cycle of "technology - economy - security."

In the global context, the impact of the plan is more profound and complex.

Its core strategy is to build an exclusive technology ecosystem led by the United States and participated by allies, and set up strict "access barriers" - only those who join the alliance can obtain core computing power and data support. Otherwise, they may face the risk of technological blockade or marginalization. This "selective opening" will undoubtedly intensify the trend of factionalization in the global scientific and technological field, extending the competition from the technological level to the level of factional game.

Meanwhile, the United States is trying to forcefully transform the technological standards it dominates into global common rules and firmly control the discourse power in the AI era. This logic is the same as its approach to leading the nuclear order in history.

As Keegan McBride, an expert from a British think - tank, said, "This is not only a technological competition but also a strong signal from the United States to the world that it will shape the future global technological landscape."

In this context, the United States is accelerating the reconstruction of the global industrial chain by continuously focusing on the top of the value chain such as high - end chip design and basic model R & D and transferring the low - and middle - end manufacturing links to its allies.

This "creative monopoly" model solidifies the United States' dominant position in the global value chain by building high - tech barriers, making it difficult for other countries to surpass and always occupying the most profitable part.

In fact, the capital market has already sent relevant signals. The continuous rise in the stock prices of the semiconductor and AI computing power fields in recent years is not entirely based on short - term performance but more reflects the capital's optimism about long - term monopoly profits. For example, institutions such as JPMorgan Chase have continuously adjusted their investment portfolios to increase relevant allocations, showing the strong interest of the capital market.

However, this promotion model based on hegemonic logic and exclusive alliances also brings many uncertainties.

If the progress of the Genesis Mission falls short of expectations, the relevant high - valued assets may face shocks. The fragmentation of the global industrial chain caused by technological blockade may also trigger new economic risks, increasing the uncertainty of the entire plan.

4

Multiple Challenges in the Plan's Advancement

Although the Genesis Mission shows the United States' grand ambition to reshape its technological hegemony, a series of structural contradictions within itself make its advancement path full of uncertainties.

Different from the "Manhattan Project" during World War II when the United States could concentrate the country's resources without multiple constraints, the current Genesis Mission faces a more complex political and economic ecosystem.

The "Manhattan Project" was born in the smoke of war, with Nazi Germany as the clear and single opponent. The United States joined hands with its allies to promote this "decisive - battle - type" project in a highly secretive and closed environment. The competition goal was straightforward and focused: to be the first to achieve a technological breakthrough in large - scale lethal weapons and reverse the war situation.

The Genesis Mission is in an era of high - level globalization - a multi - polar competition pattern has