The following are introductory remarks delivered by Michael Robbins, Chief Advocacy Officer, at AUVSI's webinar on, Supporting Drone Competitiveness For Public Safety Missions":

There has been a bit of passionate discussion in our community of late about what AUVSI is for, and what AUVSI is against, on some key policy matters. I want to take a moment to set the record straight, and let you hear this directly from AUVSI, instead of through the interpretation of others.  

Last year, AUVSI launched our Partnership for Drone Competitiveness. With the public support of more than 40 companies from across the drone ecosystem, we began a focused effort to shape, clarify, and encourage policies that would level the playing field for U.S. and allied nation drone manufacturers and their component and payload supply base.  

AUVSI does not see these issues – or any issue – as a zero sum game. By listening and learning, we have developed policy ideas that promote a reasonable, sustainable path forward by de-risking and diversifying the drone industry, not decoupling entirely from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).  

AUVSI is firmly in the middle between those that want to preserve the status quo - which isn’t working very well - and those that want to bring about an immediate ban on PRC drones - which would be extremely problematic, as we saw in Florida, which was an action we resolutely opposed.  

Our Partnership initiative is a multi-pronged effort to support policies that would encourage investment, innovation, and ultimately scaled production of drone supply chains within the United States and its allied partners. It’s intended to discover paths to local employment that expands our technological bench strength and leads us to a more balanced level of self-sustainment. 

This is important because multiple U.S. government agencies – including the Departments of Defense, Treasury, Commerce, Homeland Security, and the FBI – have made it quite clear that the continued reliance on PRC drones is a risk to national security.  

This is not AUVSI making this claim. This is the United States government.  

And these warnings are not new – they started as far back as 2017 and have increased in intensity and frequency as the scale of the threat is increasingly understood – for drones, and for the whole of our nation, as the government focuses on combatting this threat on multiple fronts including port security, securing the electrical grid, aircraft parts, and de-risking telecommunications infrastructure from PRC technology.  

This isn’t about politics, and this isn’t about lobbying – those straw man claims are an attempt to distract from the very real and present danger. Type “Volt Typhon” into your search engine to learn more.  Just don’t do it before you go to bed, as you might not sleep soundly.  

Furthermore, the continued reliance on PRC drones, which have received significant, and well documented government support, to further their already inherent cost advantages, puts U.S. and other non-PRC drone manufacturers at a disadvantage.  

By flooding the global market with subsidized drones, the PRC effectively holds back any other ability to attract capital and scale additional market share. 

Consequently, at a time when the world has watched the incredible utility of drones in warfighting, the U.S. does not have the ability to produce small UAS at scale to provide our warfighter with this important tool; whereas one of our potential future adversaries can produce drones at an overwhelming mass, giving them a key advantage in modern warfare. I can’t imagine anyone within the sound of my voice can believe this is an acceptable situation. 

Further, the PRC has already shown that they are willing to use supply chain interdiction as a coercive tool, and PRC drone software updates have aligned with Community Chinese Party policy. Continuing to maintain such a heavy reliance on the PRC for mission critical tools is just not sound public policy.  

By supporting policies that would generate demand for more drones – like Replicator, the Drone Infrastructure Investment Grant Act, grant programs for public safety, and other programs to incentive drone users to transition away from PRC drones – we can spark private capital investment into drone manufacturing and begin the process of scaling the domestic drone ecosystem that is currently struggling to scale. Ultimately, AUVSI and our members believe the U.S. government should invest in drones like they have for other key technology sectors that were overwhelmed by PRC market flooding – including semiconductors, advanced batteries, solar panels, telecommunications, and most recently, crane technology at U.S. ports. 

AUVSI does not support efforts that would bring about an immediate ban on Chinese drones.  

AUVSI does believe in our government’s commitment to finding a solution.  

AUVSI does believe in our community’s technical strength to lead us to a solution. 

AUVSI does believe in our membership’s collective will to improve our nation’s economic strength and national security. 

PRC drone companies are spending a lot of money on lobbyists, lawyers, public relations campaigns, and spokespersons on social media to defend their market share in the U.S. That has resulted in a fair amount of misinformation making its way around, particularly on the Internet. So we can certainly understand some of the concerns expressed about our positions due to the misinformation found on social media echo chambers.  

Here are the facts: 

• AUVSI recognizes the investment in materials, time, and training in drone programs across the U.S. – for first responders, search & rescue, firefighting, critical infrastructure inspection, and other important missions – and we agree that an immediate cut off of PRC drones would be harmful to those operations.  

• That is why we opposed the effort in Florida to impose an immediate ban on PRC drones.  

• That is why we oppose similar legislative efforts ongoing right now in Iowa, Missouri, Arizona, and Illinois.  

• And that is why we oppose the Countering CCP Drones Act in the U.S. House of Representatives.  

• We know drone operators – particularly in public safety – would be harmed by such ham-handed legislative efforts that do not include any transition periods.  

AUVSI does support moving certain sensitive drone operations away from PRC drones in a reasonable, thoughtful timeframe, and ideally with financial incentives to remove the burden on the operators – whether they are in public safety or other mission operations. We trust in the work of our federal law enforcement, national security, intelligence, and defense agencies that have made clear the risk of continued reliance on PRC drones for sensitive missions. We take the word of the U.S. Government over the word of PRC drone companies. 

That said, we have been actively listening to our community as a whole – and we understand why, when you hear misinformation that would directly impact your mission, your organization, potentially even your livelihoods, why you are so impassioned.  

So again, the facts: 

• Nothing AUVSI is supporting would ban the use of PRC drones for drone service providers or the general public – any suggestion otherwise is false.  

• Nothing AUVSI is supporting would bring about an immediate end to the use of PRC drones by public safety – any suggestion otherwise is false.  

• Those initiatives are out there – but they are not pushed by AUVSI and in fact, we are actively opposing them or seeking to modify them to include reasonable transition periods. 

We know that even with our moderate position on this issue, not all will agree. That is ok – we are very fortunate to live in a democracy where the freedom to disagree exists; unlike in Communist China where no such freedoms exist. God bless the USA. 

We have a choice. AUVSI has a choice. We choose the greater good and offer the will to seek the solutions to get all of us there together. 

AUVSI is the “big tent” organization – as such, whenever we take a position on almost anything – some person, or some user group, or some sector of the industry, is likely to have differing opinion.  

We recognize this as the value we gain from the diversity of our membership. Because we recognize that part of our responsibility is to hear a diversity of voices. We respect the diversity of opinions. We listen very carefully to all stakeholders – even if we can’t always find 100% agreement, we still aspire for consensus – because we are a professional, serious, mission-driven organization.  

And at the end of the day, we love everyone in our community because we ultimately all want the same thing – drones for good, uncrewed systems for good – even if we have different ideas on how we best get there.

We are all in this together, and AUVSI is committed to our collective mission to safely and securely integrate uncrewed vehicles into our future.