A single encrypted military transmission might seem irrelevant to everyday life—until it isn’t. Picture a relief worker in Ukraine who suddenly can’t coordinate deliveries because a quantum-enabled attacker took down communications. Imagine a hospital in Gaza paralysed mid-conflict when hackers intercept critical medical data. Consider other active war zones, where an adversary could cripple entire defence grids or humanitarian operations overnight; these scenarios are not far-fetched. They reflect very real vulnerabilities lurking on the horizon of tomorrow’s technology. 

Quantum computing—grounded in the extraordinary principles of quantum mechanics—promises to reshape industries, accelerate breakthroughs in fields such as drug discovery and energy and redefine national security. Yet its potential to break classical encryption also poses an existential threat to the stability of global systems, especially in regions already suffering from conflict. For the United States, leadership in quantum technology and cybersecurity is no longer merely desirable; it is vital.

Despite facing a daunting array of global challenges, the Biden administration recognised early on that a quantum-driven future demanded bold preparation. By prioritising post-quantum cryptography, supporting zero-trust cybersecurity frameworks, and funding research into groundbreaking quantum applications, Biden’s policies aimed to ensure that rapid technological advances would not outpace American defences—or leave humanitarian efforts and critical infrastructure worldwide vulnerable to exploitation. Even so, these strides represent only the first chapter of a high-stakes contest for international supremacy. China’s aggressive push in quantum communications has amplified pressure on Washington, and the incoming Trump administration must decide whether to carry this legacy forward or risk allowing a strategic rival to define the rules of engagement in an era increasingly shaped by data and cyber capability.

The Geopolitical Quantum Arms Race

Quantum breakthroughs resonate far beyond coders in Silicon Valley or lab technicians at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. They have the potential to tip the scales of conflict from the Donbas region to the streets of Gaza. Take, for example, China’s 3,800-kilometer quantum network connecting Urumqi to Moscow—this isn’t just a technological showpiece; it could become a secure communication pipeline immune to conventional eavesdropping. As China expands such networks, it stands to reshape global telecommunications and finance, forcing both allies and adversaries to operate within—or remain vulnerable to—a system governed by Beijing’s standards.

At the heart of this race, quantum computing and cybersecurity are two sides of the same coin: they can save lives or endanger them. While quantum algorithms promise breakthroughs in data analytics and scientific discovery, they also threaten classical encryption methods like RSA and ECC, leaving sensitive communications—from military channels to NGO networks—dangerously exposed. Google’s recently unveiled Willow Quantum chip underscores this transformative leap: what once would have taken the world’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion years to compute was accomplished in mere minutes.

Artificial intelligence offers a partial counterweight. Advanced AI systems can sift through immense data streams, pinpoint threats, and respond faster than any human operator. As adversaries embrace quantum-accelerated tactics, pairing AI with cutting-edge quantum security measures becomes essential—whether in drone warfare, humanitarian relief corridors, or medical supply logistics in conflict zones. The synergy between AI and robust quantum protections could ultimately decide life-or-death outcomes where real-time decisions matter most.

However, relying heavily on AI also brings its own security hazards. Machine-learning models can be tricked through data poisoning or adversarial examples, enabling attackers to bypass even sophisticated defences. Algorithmic biases in AI decision-making might exacerbate geopolitical tensions if automated systems misinterpret threats or incorrectly target individuals. A breach in AI-driven security could, at quantum-level speed, propagate system-wide vulnerabilities that become exponentially harder to contain.

The West’s experience with 5G offers a cautionary tale: slow U.S. mobilisation allowed Chinese firms to dominate key global infrastructure. With quantum, the stakes rise even higher. In active conflicts and humanitarian crises, quantum-driven hacking could disrupt supply chains or disable defence grids—threats no piecemeal policy can counter. Far from a race defined solely by qubits or encryption algorithms, quantum advancements could translate into tangible human consequences, from stalled relief efforts to compromised battlefield intelligence.

Biden’s Quantum-Cyber Legacy

Where the United States faltered during the 5G rollout, the Biden administration adopted a more proactive stance on quantum technology and cybersecurity. Through executive orders and legislative support, Biden pushed federal systems toward quantum-resistant encryption, preparing for an era when hostile actors could decrypt what was once deemed secure. Intelligence agencies already warn of “harvest now, decrypt later” tactics, wherein adversaries collect encrypted data today, betting on quantum computing breakthroughs that will eventually unlock it—a chilling possibility for sensitive military or humanitarian information.

To address vulnerabilities that quantum hacking might exploit, Biden mandated a zero-trust architecture across federal agencies. This model assumes no individual or device is automatically trustworthy and requires continuous identity verification, replacing the outdated “castle and moat” mindset of “once you’re in, you’re safe.” Meanwhile, AI-driven pilot programs are using machine learning to detect anomalies in real-time—an essential defence in rapidly evolving threat environments that also affect international NGOs or healthcare systems relying on U.S. cyber infrastructure.

Still, significant obstacles remain. Smaller agencies and private enterprises often lack the resources to meet rigorous new standards, a vulnerability that could reverberate globally if compromised software reaches conflict zones. Likewise, relying on voluntary Internet of Things (IoT) compliance—where manufacturers merely choose to adopt recommended security measures—leaves dangerous gaps that sophisticated adversaries can exploit. Despite laying a solid foundation, Biden’s quantum strategy remains incomplete. Whether the Trump administration advances or dismantles these initiatives will determine if secure communications can effectively protect both American interests and frontline operations in places like Ukraine or Gaza—where reliable encryption can be a matter of life and death.

Trump’s First 100 Days: A Quantum-Cyber Playbook

With a new administration taking office, its early decisions will ripple across conflict zones. Trump’s inclination toward deregulation could fast-track quantum research if federal funds flow more freely to innovation hubs like The Bloch Tech Hub in the Midwest. Reauthorising the National Quantum Initiative (NQI) might also expand the talent pipeline, training quantum engineers who could one day protect—or breach—communication networks in disputed regions. Meanwhile, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) continues to develop quantum-resistant cryptographic standards, and while initially started in 2012, fully implementing them with current resources could take years.

Yet scaling back Biden’s cybersecurity mandates—especially under Musk’s calls for cost-cutting—introduces significant risk. Reductions in AI-driven defences or overlooking supply-chain vulnerabilities could leave the critical infrastructure, from domestic power grids to overseas service providers, wide open to attack. Trump must reconcile his deregulatory instincts with the stark reality of quantum-enabled threats; without strong federal mandates for post-quantum encryption, adversaries gain a dangerous edge in future conflicts and essential services remain vulnerable.

The first hundred days of Trump’s presidency will shape this vision; they can reinforce or dismantle Biden’s progress at a time when global powers are jockeying for quantum dominance.

Industry Perspectives: Innovation and Collaboration

Technology giants and cybersecurity firms alike stress that government mandates alone can’t tackle all quantum threats. Katherine Ledesma of Dragos, an industrial cybersecurity company, points to the urgent need for close public-private cooperation to protect infrastructure and deploy advanced defences in places with the highest stakes—such as war-ravaged areas dependent on stable power grids or reliable digital services. 

Greg Young of Trend Micro, an IT security firm, emphasises the importance of endpoint security—safeguarding individual devices such as computers, smartphones, and servers. As computing power grows, hackers can launch more sophisticated brute force attacks, systematically guessing passwords or encryption keys until they succeed. Without stronger protections at every endpoint, critical systems across healthcare, energy, and defence sectors risk being compromised.

Smaller start-ups face a dual challenge: they must secure their products against quantum-enabled hackers while also finding capital for the R&D that keeps them competitive. Targeted grant programs and tax incentives could help these young companies meet security mandates—mandates that might ultimately save lives.

Securing America’s Quantum Future

Preventing data breaches or system failures in volatile regions requires a forward-thinking agenda. Building on the Biden administration’s progress—boosting quantum R&D funding, standardising post-quantum cryptography, and deploying AI-driven cybersecurity—can not only protect U.S. assets but also extend critical safeguards to global partners and crisis zones.

Strengthening alliances is essential. Much like the “Chip 4 Alliance” for semiconductor cooperation, a multilateral quantum coalition could unify research, align standards, and share intelligence. By forming partnerships with nations that have security stakes in active conflict regions, the U.S. would amplify both its defensive and diplomatic reach.

Such an alliance should also commit to transparent research and ethical norms, ensuring that quantum developments are harnessed for humanitarian aims rather than fueling arms races. For instance, secure quantum encryption could defend refugee networks against cyberattacks, while quantum-enabled diagnostics could enhance medical relief in war zones. Without these protections, organisations on the ground risk becoming targets of advanced threats that can derail life-saving missions.

Consistent vendor accountability remains indispensable. Companies must be responsible for securing their products through transparent software development processes, timely vulnerability patches, and robust supply-chain security. This approach ensures malicious actors cannot exploit weak links in critical systems.

Finally, balancing streamlined regulations with high-security standards will encourage private-sector innovation without sacrificing protection. Such measures benefit everyone—from relief organisations coordinating aid in conflict zones to military coalitions reliant on secure and stable operations—ultimately positioning the U.S. at the forefront of a safer, more resilient quantum future.

Conclusion: A New Era of Technological Leadership

At a glance, quantum computing might seem a distant, abstract frontier. In reality, its impact will be felt in war zones where secure communication can mean survival, in power grids that support humanitarian missions, and in the digital footprints of everyday citizens worldwide. By making an early commitment to quantum R&D and robust cybersecurity, the Biden administration laid a crucial foundation—one that can bolster both national interests and global humanitarian outcomes.

However, China’s rapid progress and the complexities of a tech-driven arms race demand sustained focus, vision, and alliances. The Trump administration’s next steps—funding, regulation, and diplomatic outreach—will decide whether the U.S. steers quantum innovation toward stabilising global security or risks leaving conflict zones and humanitarian operations vulnerable to advanced cyber onslaughts.

There is no turning back to simpler paradigms of warfare or diplomacy, isolated from data-driven threats. In this quantum-cyber nexus, leadership is more than a strategic advantage; it is a moral imperative. If the United States rises to the occasion, it may yet set the global standard in quantum technology and cybersecurity. If it falters, the consequences will extend far beyond lost prestige, threatening not just American interests but the fragile balance of global security in an era defined by unprecedented technological upheaval.