Read the AI arms race like a comparative strategist!

If you work in strategy, policy, or senior leadership, you already know the feeling: AI is now in every conversation that matters — boardrooms, budget hearings, interagency meetings, client briefings — and yet most of what passes for analysis is either vendor-driven optimism or geopolitical hand-waving that collapses under the first serious question.

You are not looking for a primer on how transformers work. You are looking for the analytical architecture to understand why governments are making the choices they are making, what is actually at stake in the US–China semiconductor conflict, how the EU's regulatory strategy functions as a form of market power, and what India's digital public infrastructure bet reveals about the strategic options available to states that want autonomy without dependency. That is precisely what this school is built to deliver.

The curriculum is organized around frameworks that come from where this problem actually lives: international relations theory, political economy, and comparative industrial policy. Great-power competition, techno-nationalism, regulatory capitalism — these are not buzzwords here. They are working tools, applied against real case evidence, tested against the hard constraints of compute concentration, talent flows, and supply chain geography. Every major actor gets a serious treatment: the US model of private-sector primacy and export-control coercion, China's civil-military fusion strategy, the EU's regulatory-first approach to digital sovereignty, and the more complex hedging strategies of India, the Gulf, and the swing states whose alignment decisions will shape the next decade.

The school culminates in something you can actually use. The final unit is structured around professional deliverables — the briefing document, the policy memo, the board presentation — because rigorous analysis is only as valuable as your ability to communicate it to decision-makers. The capstone asks you to produce a structured comparative assessment of a nation of your choosing, applying the frameworks, engaging the evidence, and arriving at defensible conclusions.

I designed this school because I believe that the people who most need a clear-eyed map of this landscape — the analysts, consultants, executives, and researchers who are being asked to advise on it right now — are the least well-served by what is currently available. You deserve material that respects your intelligence and matches the seriousness of the questions you are being paid to answer.

If that is where you are, I am glad you are here. Let's get to work.