The American AI Export Program is the Trump administration’s flagship initiative to spread US AI across the world. But so far, it’s not going too well: - It’s months behind schedule - It lacks the financial firepower to actually steer industry investment decisions - It faces mounting distrust from foreign partners wary of dependence on the US @fiiiiiist , @SamWinterLevy, and I offer 9 recommendations to put the Exports Program on track. ⬇️ 1. Prioritize markets where American AI presence is contested or weak. The program shouldn't subsidize markets where American industry already leads. Agencies should direct financing toward emerging strategic markets like Brazil, Egypt, and Indonesia, where American and Chinese firms are actively competing and government support can actually tip the balance. 2. Don't just offer data center-scale packages. Few markets have gigawatt-scale demand. A program that prioritizes packages this size will miss large parts of the world, including emerging markets that the program should be targeting. Smaller deployments that meet actual AI demand offer more lasting advantages than compelling headlines. 3. Let industry lead the messaging. Foreign governments are not driven by US geopolitical concerns. Partners that have spent years resisting pressure to pick sides in US-China competition won't respond to that framing. Commerce and State should focus on concrete, country-specific issues and let American companies take the lead. 4. Judge program success by long-term adoption and utilization. The program's success should be measured by sustained demand, not by dollar values announced at signing ceremonies. Commerce, OSTP, and State should track time-to-operation, utilization rates, contract renewals, and private capital mobilized rather than headline investment figures. 5. Clarify that US-operated cloud services count as an export. The executive order does not state whether AI "deployment" means physical hardware sales to foreign customers, or delivering compute as part of managed cloud services. OSTP and Commerce should resolve this ambiguity. Cloud has a bunch of properties that match the program’s goals. It’s typically faster to deploy, more scalable, more sticky, and offers national security advantages that direct chip shipments cannot. 6. Implement baseline security guardrails for packages that export substantial compute abroad. Some markets could become subject to new export restrictions as US policy evolves. Rather than treating export promotion and control as separate levers, Commerce should establish security requirements now so that industry deployments aren't negatively impacted later. 7. Drop the consortia requirement for American-only proposals. Requiring US companies to form consortia even when operating alone adds coordination costs, creates accountability confusion, and may freeze out smaller players. Agencies should clarify that consortium formation isn't required when American companies are exporting without foreign partners, preserving the option for larger voluntary consortia where they make sense. 8. Take foreign partners' sovereignty concerns seriously. Many countries want American AI without American dependency. In-country data centers and confidential computing give partners jurisdictional control while keeping American companies operating their own infrastructure. 9. Bundle exports with sovereign evaluation toolkits. Partners should be able to verify what they're buying, and the US should look to build trust in US tech. CAISI can develop evaluation toolkits that let countries independently assess US models' performance and safety, exporting US standards alongside its technology. You can read the full piece here: ifp.org/americas-ai-exports-…