To fortify the U.S. against foreign adversaries, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chair Brendan Carr announced the formation of the Council for National Security, an initiative aimed squarely at countering threats from China and other foreign entities. The new council signals an aggressive shift in the FCC’s role, extending its regulatory oversight beyond spectrum management into a frontline position in America’s broader national security strategy.
“Today, the country faces a persistent and constant threat from foreign adversaries, particularly the CCP [Chinese Communist Party],” Carr said in a statement. “These bad actors are always exploring ways to breach our networks, devices, and technology ecosystem. It is more important than ever that the FCC remain vigilant and protect Americans and American companies from these threats.”
The council will be led by Adam Chan, a legal expert from Boyden Gray PLLC, and will focus on three key areas: reducing U.S. dependencies on foreign adversaries in tech and telecom supply chains, mitigating vulnerabilities to cyberattacks and espionage, and ensuring the U.S. maintains leadership in critical emerging technologies such as 5G, AI, quantum computing, and space-based communications.
The Spectrum Battleground
The FCC’s move comes amid an escalating tug-of-war over the electromagnetic spectrum—particularly the coveted 3 GHz to 6 GHz range—between commercial telecom giants and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). The DoD has long insisted that this portion of the spectrum is indispensable for national security functions, including satellite communications, radar operations, and advanced navigation systems. However, commercial players, both domestic and foreign, are eager to expand their high-speed wireless services using this prime real estate.
John Sherman, former DoD Chief Information Officer and now dean at Texas A&M’s Bush School of Government and Public Service, has previously described this fight as a zero-sum game.
“There is finite spectrum, and the physics of the spectrum, about the desirability of the lower [3 GHz band] both for our target acquisition radars and for 5G, this makes it very difficult,” Sherman told Breaking Defense.
Carr has been known to favor the commercial sector’s position in these disputes, making today’s announcement particularly significant. Some defense experts may interpret the move as a tilt away from DoD interests and toward an approach that prioritizes U.S. telecom dominance in the global market over military control of critical frequencies.
An Expanding Role for the FCC?
While the FCC has historically focused on regulating airwaves and telecommunications, this new council could provide the agency with unprecedented enforcement capabilities in the name of national security. That could mean tighter restrictions on foreign-made telecom infrastructure, more stringent cybersecurity requirements, and potentially, greater oversight of companies with foreign supply chain dependencies.
Evan Dornbush, a former NSA cybersecurity expert, sees the move as a significant shift in the FCC’s power dynamic.
"The FCC announcement to build a China-focused response capability is only a few days old, so it may be too early to understand the first-order tactics (and their effectiveness). This is a bold step. The FCC owns the airwaves, and with so much technology leveraging wireless, from drones using GNSS, to cellular networks using foreign-made 5G routing, to mesh networks coordinating over the managed spectrum, it's clear the FCC is crucially placed to have impact,” Dornbush said.
The council’s potential impact extends beyond telecom. Dornbush pointed to past vulnerabilities in U.S. telecommunications infrastructure—such as when telecom carriers revealed that lawful intercept systems required under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) had been compromised by foreign adversaries. That incident led Congress to allocate $3 billion to “rip and replace” foreign-made telecom equipment. Even with that effort, vulnerabilities persist, particularly in aging infrastructure still in operation.
“What might it take for these companies to upgrade?” Dornbush asks. “The new authorities could increase audits and inspections. It could increase stricter fines or other penalties.”
Moreover, Dornbush highlighted another concern: the common practice of foreign companies using U.S. shell entities to evade restrictions on telecom licenses. He suggested the FCC could use its new enforcement mechanisms to crack down on these loopholes, ensuring that supply chains are more transparent and resistant to foreign infiltration.
A Necessary Safeguard or a Regulatory Overreach?
The launch of the Council for National Security underscores a growing sense of urgency in Washington over China’s technological ambitions. With Beijing aggressively pushing forward in AI, quantum computing, and next-generation wireless technology, U.S. regulators are scrambling to ensure that American companies—and government agencies—are not left vulnerable.
Yet, while some see this as a much-needed measure to protect national interests, others worry about the FCC extending its regulatory reach beyond its traditional purview. With tensions between federal agencies like the FCC and DoD already simmering over spectrum policy, today’s announcement may add another layer of complexity to an already contentious debate.
For now, the real question remains: Will the FCC’s new security council have the teeth to make a meaningful impact, or will it simply add another bureaucratic layer to an already fragmented U.S. cyber and telecom security landscape? One thing is clear—foreign adversaries, particularly China, will be watching closely.