EVALUATING THE NATIONAL SECURITY AND ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF U.S. RESTRICTIONS ON FOREIGN DRONES
Keywords:
U.S. drone ban, AI surveillance security, national security, foreign-manufactured drones, cyber security vulnerabilities, MAC address tracking, policy alternativesAbstract
This work investigates not only about the increasing use of overseas produced drones (especially of Chinese and Russian companies) in the U.S., but also the potential consequences on the national security, sectors and economic strength. The Commerce Department has restricted these drones on the grounds of spying threats, vulnerability to cyber-security risks as well as the integration of AI (Artificial Intelligence) chips inside them. These risks involve things like data exfiltration, AI model poisoning and firmware backdoors that could all impact sensitive data and national security. But the ban has also presented extensive operational and economic hardships, particularly in sectors that depend on drones, including agriculture, emergency response and infrastructure inspections. These are companies that rely on low-cost foreign drones such as DJI and this need for affordable local alternatives has hampered the fortunes for them leading to higher operational costs and inefficiencies. The paper goes on to argue that these issues prompt a consideration of an equilibrium approach to regulation. A total ban on all foreign drones may be unwise, but a more selective policy that focuses on models we know represent a risk to our national security could be used to neutralize these threats without damaging vital areas of the economy. The research also suggest that there should be investment for manufacturing of drones domestically, robust cyber security for AI managed drones and public-private partnership to promote innovation in domestic UAV sector. Doing so will allow the U.S. government to protect national security while minimizing economic dislocation and maintaining forward momentum in areas that rely on drone technology.
Downloads
References
Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) (2023). Market Trends in AI-Powered Drones.
Boussios, E. (2017). Drones in war: The controversies surrounding the United States’ expanded use of drones. Contemporary Voices: St Andrews Journal of International Relations, 8(4), 48–52.
Boyle, M. J., Horowitz, M. C., Kreps, S. E., & Fuhrmann, M. (2018). Debating drone proliferation. International Security, 42(3), 178–181.
Carafano, J. J. (2020). Technology and great power competition: 5 top challenges for the next decade. https://www.heritage.org/technology/commentary/technology-and-great-power-competition-5-top-challenges-the-next-decade
Carter, K. L. (2021). Coming soon to a theater (of war) near you: Drones of all shapes and sizes. In Drones and global order (pp. 191–208). Routledge.
Castelino, T. (2018). An action plan on US drone policy: Recommendations for the Trump Administration. Arms Control Today, 48(6), 37–39.
Chávez, K., & Swed, O. (2020a). Off the shelf: The violent nonstate actor drone threat. Air & Space Power Journal, 29(9), 237.
Chávez, K., & Swed, O. (2020b). The proliferation of drones to violent non-state actors. Defense Studies, 13(5), 1–9.
China Daily (2024). DJI’s Response to U.S. Drone Ban: Economic and Policy Implications.
Congressional Research Service (2024). Comparative Analysis of U.S. and Global Drone Security Policies.
Cummings, A. R., McKee, A., Kulkarni, K., & Markandey, N. (2017). The rise of UAVs. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, 83(4), 317–325.
Cyber security & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) (2023). Threat Assessment of AI-Integrated Foreign Surveillance Drones.
European Union Agency for Cyber security (ENISA) (2024). AI and Cyber security Threats in Surveillance Drones.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (2024). Cyber security Guidelines for AI-Enabled Surveillance Drones.
Florida Legislature (2023). Ban on Foreign-Made Drones in Government Operations.
Harvard Law Review (2023). Legal Challenges of Banning Foreign AI-Powered Surveillance Drones.
Hassan Rasheed Siddiqui, and Ms. Maria Muniza. (2024). “The Drone’s Gaze: Religious Perspective on Privacy and Human Dignity in the Age of Surveillance.” Al-Qamar.
Hassan Rasheed Siddiqui, Maria Muniza. (2025). Analyzing the Shortfalls of the U.S. Countering CCP Drones Act in Light of China’s National Intelligence Law. Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review.
House Armed Services Committee (2024). National Defense Authorization Act and Foreign Drone Restrictions.
IEEE Transactions on Cyber security (2023). Firmware Backdoors in AI-Integrated UAVs.
Journal of International Security (2023). The Role of AI in Modern Espionage and Cyber Warfare.
Journal of National Security Studies (2024). Supply Chain Risks in Foreign-Manufactured AI Surveillance Systems.
MIT Technology Review (2024). Adversarial AI Attacks on Autonomous Drone Systems.
Nagl, J., cited in Bregen, P. (2016). United States of Jihad: Investigating America’s homegrown terrorists. Proceedings, 142, 72–73.
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (2024). AI Security and Data Protection in UAV Technology.
Okpaleke, F. N. (2021). The implications of unchecked armed drone proliferation for global security. African Strategic Review, 4(1).
Okpaleke, F. N., Nwosu, B. U., Okoli, C. R., & Olumba, E. E. (2023). The case for drones in counter-insurgency operations in West African Sahel. African Security Review, 32, 351–367.
Posen, B. R. (2018, March 28). The rise of illiberal hegemony: Trump’s surprising grand strategy. Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-02-13/rise-illiberal-hegemony
RAND Corporation (2024). Assessing the Risks of AI in Military-Grade UAVs.
Rao, B., Harrison, A. J., & Mulloth, B. (2020). Defense technological innovation: Issues and challenges in an era of converging technologies. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Rogers, A., & Hill, J. (2014). Unmanned: Drone warfare and global security. Between the Lines.
Rogers, J. (2021). Future threats: Military UAS, terrorist drones, and the dangers of the second drone age. In Drone warfare: Trends and emerging issues (pp. 481–505). The Joint Air Power Competence Centre.
Rossiter, A. (2018). Drone usage by militant groups: Exploring variation in adoption. Defense & Security Analysis, 34(2), 113–126.
Russell, S. (2023). AI weapons: Russia’s war in Ukraine shows why the world must enact a ban. Nature, 614(7949), 620–623.
Savage, C., & Schmitt, E. (2017). Trump poised to drop some limits on drone strikes and commando raids. International New York Times, NA–NA.
Siddiqui, H. R., & Muniza, M. (2025). Hybrid Warfare and the Global Threat of Data Surveillance: The Case for International Standards and Regulation. Pakistan Social Sciences Review.
Siddiqui, H. R., & Muniza, M. (2025). Regulatory Gaps in Drone Surveillance: Addressing Privacy, Security, and Manufacturing Standards. Annals of Human and Social Sciences.
Teal Group. (2020). Teal Group predicts worldwide military production of drones of over $99 billion in the next decade. https://www.tealgroup.com/index.php/pages/press-releases/64-teal-group-predicts-worldwide-military-uav-production-of-almost-99-billion-over-the-next-decade-in-its-2019-2020-uav-market-profile-and-forecast
Texas State Government (2023). Legislation on Restricting Foreign Drone Use in Public Infrastructure Monitoring.
Tripp, B. (2020). Deterrence and drones: Are militaries becoming addicted, and what is the prognosis? In A. Filippidou (Ed.), Deterrence: Concepts and approaches for current and emerging threats. Springer.
U.S. Department of Commerce (2024). National Security Concerns Over Foreign Drone Technology.
U.S. Department of Defense (2024). AI Warfare and Autonomous UAV Threats.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2023). Espionage Risks in AI-Powered UAV Systems.
UK Parliament Science and Technology Committee (2023). Legislative Approaches to AI-Powered UAV Security.
Wezman, P. D., Fluerant, A., Kuimova, A., Tian, N., & Wezeman, S. T. (2019, March). Trends in international arms transfers, 2018. SIPRI. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2019-03/fs_1903_at_2018.pdf
Wong, Y. H., Yurchak, J. M., Button, R. W., Frank, A., Laird, B., Osoba, O. A., & Bae, S. J. (2020). Deterrence in the age of thinking machines. RAND Corporation.
Wu, X. (2020). Technology, power, and uncontrolled great power strategic competition between China and the United States. China International Strategy Review, 2(1), 99–119.
Zenko, M. (2013). Reforming US drone strike policies (No. 65, pp. 56–58). Council on Foreign Relations.
Zenko, M. (2017a). The (not-so) peaceful transition of power: Trump’s drone strikes outpace Obama. Council on Foreign Relations.
Zenko, M. (2017b, February 2). Trump could take Obama’s drone war further into the shadows. Foreign Policy. Retrieved May 29, 2023, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/02/the-buck-doesnt-stop-with-trump-on-counterterrorism/
Zoli, C. (2017). The changing role of law in security governance: Post-9/11 gray zones and strategic impacts. Syracuse Law Review, 67(613).
Hassan Rasheed Siddiqui, Maria Muniza. (2025). ANALYZING THE SHORTFALLS OF THE U.S. COUNTERING CCP DRONES ACTH.R.2864IN LIGHT OF CHINA’S NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE LAW AND THE ZHENHUA DATA 2020. Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review, 3(1), 567–584. Retrieved from https://jssr.online/index.php/4/article/view/94
Siddiqui, H. R., & Muniza, M. (2025). Regulatory Gaps in Drone Surveillance: Addressing Privacy, Security, and Manufacturing Standards. Annals of Human and Social Sciences, 6(1), 415–428. https://doi.org/10.35484/ahss.2025(6-I)36
Siddiqui, H. R., & Muniza, M. (2025). Hybrid Warfare and the Global Threat of Data Surveillance: The Case for International Standards and Regulation. Pakistan Social Sciences Review, 9(1), 519–531. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2025(9-I)41
Hassan Rasheed Siddiqui, and Ms. Maria Muniza. 2024. “The Drone’s Gaze, Religious Perspective on Privacy and Human Dignity in the Age of Surveillance Mentioning Security Threats & Regulatory Gaps”. Al-Qamar, December, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.53762/alqamar.07.04.e0
https://crlsj.com/index.php/journal/article/view/448 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52783/crlsj.448
16th-https://crlsj.com/index.php/journal/article/view/449
Siddiqui, H. R. ., & Leghari, A. . (2007). FAITH, FREEDOM, AND THE FUTURE: RECLAIMING INCLUSIVE DEMOCRATIC VALUES IN SOUTH ASIA. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 13(1), 107–116. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2868 2. Siddiqui, H. R. ., & Leghari, A. . (2008). LIBERALISM IN SOUTH ASIA, A CASE STUDY OF CIVIC LEADERSHIP AND INTERFAITH HARMONY. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 14(2), 90–97. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2870 3. Siddiqui, H. R. ., & Muniza, M. . (2009). SOWING ILLUSIONS, REAPING DISARRAY: MEDIA INFLUENCE, URBAN MIGRATION, AND THE DISMANTLING OF SOCIETAL NORMS IN SOUTH ASIA. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 15(2), 126–139. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2871 4. Siddiqui, H. R. . (2011). IN THE COURT OF KNOWLEDGE, JUDGING THE JUDGES OF LEARNING. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 17(1), 83 91. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2872 5. Siddiqui, H. R. . (2013). THE PERSONAL LENS IN ACADEMIC EVALUATION: A CRITIQUE OF EDUCATOR BIAS. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 19(1), 93–101. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323 6903/article/view/2873 6. Siddiqui, H. R. (2016). ESTABLISHING AIR AMBULANCE SERVICES IN PAKISTAN: A REGULATORY AND INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL AVIATION. Journal of Advanced Research in Medical and Health Science (ISSN 2208-2425), 2(5), 17 30. https://doi.org/10.61841/z1tjva12 7. Siddiqui, H. R. . (2019). WHO JUDGES THE JUDGES? ADDRESSING INTEGRITY AND SECURITY GAPS IN THE SINDH JUDICIAL RECRUITMENT SYSTEM. International Journal of Advance Research in Education & Literature (ISSN 2208-2441), 5(8), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.61841/txq2w096 8. Siddiqui, H. R. (2022). PUBLIC FUNDS, PRIVATE GAINS: INVESTIGATING CORRUPTION IN NADRA’S MEGA CENTER LEASE DEALS. Journal of Advance Research in Social Science and Humanities (ISSN 2208-2387), 8(12), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.61841/2s3kmv78 9. Siddiqui, H. R. (2023). STRUCTURAL INJUSTICES IN THE RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN MEDICAL DEGREES BY THE PAKISTAN MEDICAL COUNCIL: A CALL FOR POLICY REFORM. Journal of Advanced Research in Medical and Health Science (ISSN 2208-2425), 9(1), 58 67. https://doi.org/10.61841/vmqgts53
H. R. . (2010). DELAYED JUSTICE AND DUAL STANDARDS: THE ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRAL AWARDS IN PAKISTAN. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 16(2), 88–99. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/2877
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Naveed HussainYou are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
