Nand Mulchandani, the CIA’s first chief technology officer, is preparing for the Trump administration

In April 2022, the CIA decided to deal a knockout blow to Nand Mulchandani, appointing him as its first-ever CTO. It was a good look for the CIA. Mulchandani, who previously served as chief technology officer and acting director of the Department of Defense’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, is a rare breed in Washington. Before becoming a government employee, he co-founded and was CEO of a series of Bay Area companies with almost comical Silicon Valley names: Oblix, Determina, OpenDNS, and ScaleXtreme, each of which was acquired by a tech giant (Oracle, VMWare, Cisco, Citrix, respectively).

Mulchandani may soon be outflanked by fellow founders and technologists as the Trump administration sweeps into Washington with powerful advisers like Elon Musk.

We recently spoke with Mulchandani about this shift, its potential impacts, and whether he hopes to be a part of it. It’s a lingering question given that Mulchandani was not chosen by the president and that his boss, CIA Director William Burns, is stepping down, and will be replaced by John Ratcliffe, a former congressman from Texas who was director of national intelligence under President-elect Trump. During Trump’s first term.

The following has been edited for length.

What conversations are taking place now before the Trump administration arrives?

The big picture is that no one believes there is a big change coming regarding technology and China. When Director Burns joined, his focus, redirection, and focus of this agency was primarily on great power competition. The way we like to talk about it is that obviously kinetic warfare (i.e. conventional combat) and stuff happens in the world all the time. But the next generation of competition is economic competition, and at its heart is technological competition. So the way he defined the agency’s strategic priorities was basically China-focused, and again, this shift toward technology. So launch (Two new mission centers (In 2021, one focused on China and the other dedicated to transnational and technology threats) Then the creation of the CTO role marked the big organizational changes he made. In all honesty… these may remain priorities for any future administration….

Obviously, we’re hearing a lot about DOGE and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy’s plans to shrink — or at least offer their suggestions on how to shrink — the size of government. Has anyone from Musk’s camp talked to anyone at the CIA? Jared Birchall, head of Musk’s family office, was reportedly speaking, for example, to Ministry of Foreign Affairs candidates.

I cannot speak to specific presidential transitions taking place at the government level. What I can talk about — although it’s not a commentary on DOGE itself but it’s one of the key themes we’ve been pushing — is technology empowerment of government and government operations. . . And use artificial intelligence and other tools to bring precision and scale to our activities. So I can’t comment specifically on what they are trying to achieve. Is it a cost? Is it widespread technology dissemination? Our focus is kind of all of the above. . . . I mean it would be crazy not to focus on that as much, and we’re focusing on that as well.

In any transition, people come in trying to evaluate what they should prioritize. At the CIA, what should those priorities be?

There are evergreen problems that will exist forever. The first is our focus on data insights, I know it sounds like buzzword bingo, but AI in particular – deploying that (the right way has to be a priority). If we had a blank canvas, what I would draw for you is the trajectory of the world’s data and its growth. As an intelligence agency, we are extremely data-hungry, whether it is human, cyber or geographic intelligence gathering. . . This is the essence of the intelligence service. The problem is that the path, scope, and volume of data is growing every day, and you can always find more data to dump and bring in — some good, some crap. As this pipeline grows infinitely, we need to constantly retool our infrastructure, systems, and applications. . .

Number two (is related to) the growing side of defense technology and the idea of ​​disruptive Silicon Valley companies that are now leaning into military technology and leaning into national security and serving us with products and services. This trend is important for us to continue to support.

One of the big (related) initiatives we’ve run that has scaled is: How can we significantly lower the bar for commercial technology onboarding? This is what we call the inner arc. The other side of it is, how do we actually present our requirements? So, as a spy agency, as an intelligence agency, we are not culturally equipped to talk outward about our problems and problem sets and initiatives and strategic things; We’ve traditionally been very quiet or very cautious about this kind of thing. Obviously we have to keep our work confidential, but now we have another initiative that we’re going to start in the next month or so where we’re going to have very direct conversations with investors, VCs and startups (about these things). needs). . . Instead of tactically focusing on buying, acquisitions or other pieces only.

Speaking of venture capital, what do you personally think of people like Marc Andreessen Advise President-elect Trump on employment? He’s obviously a very smart guy, but sometimes his skills can’t be transferred to other industries.

I would say that’s out of my pay range. I mean, I know a lot of these people, and they’re obviously crazy smart. I’ll give you my personal experience – and obviously I can’t advise the president directly on non-technology matters. But what ends up happening is that as a former CEO, as an entrepreneur, the thing that I often talk about in the agency at our leadership level is business models. I hope my degree in computer science qualifies me to talk about (technology). The other piece of experience that I bring to the table is running these companies and making business decisions, and my feeling is that that experience and that perspective is very valuable in Washington. Sometimes I feel like in government, we don’t talk often enough about business models and how to run things efficiently, how to scale, how technology is destroying business models, and how it can enable new business models. Many of the projects I bring on or participate in, I always try to open with: How is our business model changing at the CIA? As a human intelligence organization in the world of technology, in the world of artificial intelligence, in the world of great power competition, in the world of difficult target areas for us to continue to conduct our business, what does the CIA’s business model look like in five, 10, 20 years from now, and how will it change? ?

You are not a political appointee. Would you like to stay if that was an option or are you ready to return to Silicon Valley? I know you’ve been traveling between coasts for the past five years.

This is a discussion I have with my wife and kids almost every day. I’m actually in the East Bay (in San Francisco) now, where we live. My wife got her career. Our children are well settled. We have close relatives. So I was commuting almost every week to Washington or to other places where the agency and the Department of Defense (before that) had sent me or needed me. And I have to be honest with you, the mileage is showing now. . .

The broader issue that I think is still a concern is that there aren’t enough Valley residents in D.C., and that’s something I’m personally very concerned about. When I look around D.C., I can literally count on one hand the number of people who have been in positions like me, which means (they have) deep roots in the Valley. It’s a big commitment, especially for people with children and families.

Could you see a day when the CIA establishes a second center on the West Coast?

Currently, we are well established at our headquarters (in Langley, Virginia). But if they bring some new thinking to this administration, and want more people involved in technology, who knows?