U.S. President Donald Trump has signaled a significant shift in his administration’s posture toward AI startup Anthropic, saying he no longer views the company as a potential national security threat after it moved quickly to comply with government demands restricting foreign access to its most advanced models.

The comments, made in an interview with The Axios Show published Friday, offer fresh insight into how the White House is approaching the regulation of frontier artificial intelligence systems and underscore the growing willingness of governments to treat leading AI companies as strategic national assets rather than ordinary technology businesses.

Asked whether he viewed Anthropic or its chief executive, Dario Amodei, as a threat to national security, Trump replied: “Well, not now, but a week ago, maybe.”

The remark follows a dramatic confrontation between the administration and Anthropic over access to the company’s newest AI systems, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, which are regarded as among the most capable models currently available.

The dispute emerged after Trump ordered Anthropic to block foreign nationals from accessing the advanced models, citing national security concerns surrounding frontier AI capabilities. In response, Anthropic last week disabled access to both Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for all users, a move that shocked parts of the technology industry and intensified debate over government intervention in AI development.

Trump suggested the company’s response helped ease White House concerns. According to the Axios interview, the president said Amodei responded to the administration’s export-control directive “very quickly” and “responsibly.”

That indicates that Anthropic’s willingness to cooperate may have prevented a deeper confrontation with federal authorities.

Senior technical staff from Anthropic were reportedly scheduled to meet administration officials earlier this week to discuss the restrictions and broader concerns surrounding access to frontier AI models.

National Security Is Becoming Central to AI Policy

The episode illustrates how rapidly artificial intelligence has moved from a commercial technology issue to a national security concern in Washington. Only a few years ago, debates around AI focused primarily on innovation, productivity, and competition among technology companies.

Today, policymakers see advanced AI systems through the same lens applied to semiconductors, defense technologies, and critical infrastructure.

Anthropic itself has contributed to that shift.

In recent months, Amodei has repeatedly warned that next-generation AI systems pose serious risks to cybersecurity, financial systems, critical infrastructure, and national security. The company has also advocated stronger government oversight of advanced AI development and has argued that frontier models may eventually require safeguards similar to those applied to other strategic technologies.

Ironically, some industry observers argue that those warnings helped create the political environment that led to the administration’s intervention.

Trump Keeps Pressure on the Table

Although Trump’s latest comments were more conciliatory, he stopped short of ruling out further government action. According to Axios, the president did not exclude the possibility of invoking powers under the Defense Production Act (DPA), a Cold War-era law that gives the federal government broad authority to direct private-sector activity in matters deemed critical to national security.

When asked about the possibility, Trump said: “I have the power to use a lot of things.”

He added: “But I’m not sure I have to do that.”

The statement suggests that while the administration may be satisfied with Anthropic’s cooperation for now, it wants to retain leverage over companies developing frontier AI systems. The possibility of using the Defense Production Act against an AI company would represent an extraordinary escalation in government involvement in the sector and could establish a precedent for future intervention.

The issue surfaced during a week in which Trump and other world leaders met technology executives at the G7 summit in France. Amodei was among the AI leaders who participated in discussions with government officials, reflecting the growing influence of AI firms in geopolitical and economic policymaking. The meetings come as countries race to establish leadership in artificial intelligence, a competition increasingly viewed as central to future economic growth, military capability, and technological influence.

Anthropic responded cautiously to Trump’s comments, emphasizing collaboration rather than confrontation.

A company spokesperson said, “We are grateful to the administration for their ongoing partnership in working to get this matter resolved as quickly as possible.”

The spokesperson added: “We remain committed to working alongside them towards our shared goals of protecting critical infrastructure and making sure the U.S. leads in AI.”

For years, megacap technology companies with fortress-like balance sheets could largely tune out the Federal Reserve, treating interest rate cycles as a secondary concern that hit smaller, less profitable rivals far harder. That era is ending. Artificial intelligence is turning once-cash-rich tech leaders into heavy borrowers racing to build out power-hungry data centers, making the sector newly and acutely sensitive to borrowing costs and monetary policy signals.

The shift was on full display this week as investors digested Federal Reserve Chairman Kevin Warsh’s first press conference, where the central bank left the door open to a rate hike later in 2026 amid persistent inflation concerns. The 10-year Treasury yield climbed near 4.45%, and tech stocks felt the pressure. For an industry long valued on future growth rather than current cash flows, higher rates now carry a more immediate sting.

“Tech investors are not as used to looking at rates,” Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer of One Point BFG Wealth Partners, said in an interview. “All of a sudden tech investors need to listen to what Kevin Warsh has to say, they need to start paying attention to what the inflation stats are and how the U.S. Treasury market responds to it.”

The reason is straightforward but profound: the hyperscalers are in the midst of an unprecedented capital expenditure arms race. Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Meta alone are projected to deploy a combined $750 billion this year on AI infrastructure — an 80% jump from 2025. Much of that spending is being financed through debt, turning companies that once generated mountains of free cash flow into more traditional, capital-intensive businesses.

From Cash Cows to Borrowers

Goldman Sachs recently highlighted that capital expenditure as a percentage of cash flow for big tech is at its highest level since the dot-com bubble era. The bank expects total tech capex this year to approach $920 billion, noting that Wall Street estimates have consistently proven “too conservative” in each of the past three years.

Amazon, forecasting roughly $200 billion in spending, is widely expected to post negative free cash flow. Other giants are similarly tapping debt markets aggressively. Nvidia, Oracle, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta have each issued tens of billions in bonds recently. OpenAI’s CFO Sarah Friar has cited access to debt markets as one motivation for going public, while bankers for SpaceX, fresh off its record Nasdaq debut, are already preparing investors for a potential $20 billion bond offering.

“It’s underappreciated,” said Jeff Kilburg, CEO of KKM Financial. “There’s an insatiable demand for AI-related funding. Tech leadership is embracing debt. It’s the perfect recipe for these AI folks who feel comfortable in what they want to borrow, and spend.”

This borrowing surge changes how investors must assess the sector. Higher interest rates raise the cost of capital for these massive buildouts and increase the discount rate applied to future cash flows — the very metric that has long justified sky-high valuations for growth stocks.

A New Reality for Tech Valuations

For smaller tech companies, rate sensitivity has always been part of the game. Investors price them on distant profits, so when the “risk-free rate” rises, those future earnings become worth less today. Now the effect is moving upstream to the biggest names.

Jay Woods, chief market strategist at Freedom Capital Markets, cautions against painting the entire sector with one brush. Nvidia, for instance, remains in a strong cash position, with free cash flow surging past $48.5 billion in the latest quarter, up from $26.1 billion a year earlier.

“They still have a deep cash bench, so I don’t think it’s that big of a red flag,” Woods said about Nvidia. “It does give them flexibility.”

Even so, the broader trend is unmistakable. Tech giants are increasingly behaving like old-economy industrials — capital-intensive, reliant on both debt and equity markets, and vulnerable to swings in borrowing costs and commodity prices (especially energy for data centers).

Boockvar frames it as a fundamental evolution.

“Tech investors are learning what it’s like to be an investor in old-economy industrial businesses that are capital intensive. Free cash flow is volatile and access to both debt and equity markets are crucial in order to finance it all,” he said.

Issuing debt can be strategic, preserving liquidity for acquisitions or providing flexibility for long-term projects, but it also introduces new risks if rates keep climbing or credit conditions tighten.

What This Means for Markets and the AI Race

The implications extend beyond individual companies. As mega-cap tech becomes more rate-sensitive, the sector’s role as a market leader could introduce new volatility. Investors who once viewed big tech as a defensive growth haven may need to reassess in an environment where Fed decisions carry heavier weight.

This dynamic also raises questions about the sustainability of the AI buildout. If higher rates meaningfully increase financing costs, some projects could be delayed or scaled back, potentially slowing the pace of AI advancement. At the same time, the race for dominance may force companies to accept higher borrowing costs rather than cede ground to rivals.

Warsh’s signals this week, leaving the door open to hikes amid sticky inflation, served as an early test of this new reality. Tech stocks sold off, yields rose, and the message was that the days of big tech being largely insulated from monetary policy are over.

For an industry that has driven much of the market’s gains in recent years, this transition marks a new chapter. The AI boom is real, but its capital intensity is forcing even the largest players to confront economic fundamentals they could once largely ignore. As Peter Boockvar noted, tech investors now have an entirely new reason to pay close attention to the Federal Reserve — and that attention is unlikely to fade anytime soon.

Japan is preparing one of its most ambitious industrial policy initiatives in decades, with plans to mobilize roughly 370 trillion yen ($2.3 trillion) in combined public and private investment by 2040 across strategically important sectors ranging from artificial intelligence and semiconductors to space technology and economic security infrastructure.

According to a report by the Nikkei, the initiative forms a central pillar of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s new growth strategy and could be unveiled as early as next week. The plan is expected to direct resources into 17 strategic industries that Tokyo views as critical to maintaining economic competitiveness, technological leadership, and national security in an increasingly fragmented global economy.

The scale of the proposed investment underscores how dramatically the global industrial landscape has changed since the pandemic, the U.S.-China technology rivalry, and the recent surge in artificial intelligence investment. Governments around the world are now intervening in sectors once left largely to market forces, viewing advanced technologies as strategic assets rather than purely commercial industries.

For Japan, the initiative represents a significant shift from decades of sluggish investment growth and reflects concerns that the country risks falling behind the United States and China in technologies expected to drive future economic expansion.

The planned investment push appears designed to replicate, on a larger scale, the success of recent government-backed efforts to rebuild Japan’s semiconductor industry.

In recent years, Tokyo has committed billions of dollars in subsidies to attract chip manufacturing and secure supply chains. Projects involving Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, domestic chip ventures, and next-generation semiconductor initiatives have become central to Japan’s industrial strategy.

The new framework would expand that approach beyond semiconductors into a broader set of sectors, including:

• Artificial intelligence
• Advanced semiconductors
• Space development
• Quantum technologies
• Cybersecurity
• Defense-related technologies
• Advanced manufacturing
• Energy security infrastructure

The emphasis on AI is notable given the escalating global race to build computing infrastructure, data centers, and next-generation AI models.

A key feature of the strategy is its focus on economic security. Japanese policymakers increasingly see technological capabilities as national security assets, especially after disruptions caused by the pandemic, geopolitical tensions in East Asia, and growing competition between Washington and Beijing.

Tokyo has become more concerned about supply-chain vulnerabilities in critical materials, semiconductors, and advanced technologies.

The investment program is therefore likely to serve dual objectives: stimulating economic growth while reducing dependence on foreign suppliers in strategically sensitive sectors.

The approach mirrors policies being pursued elsewhere.

The United States has deployed hundreds of billions of dollars through legislation such as the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, while China continues to invest heavily in domestic technology development through state-backed programs.

Japan appears determined not to be left behind.

Using Public Money to Unlock Private Capital

One of the most significant aspects of the proposal is that government funding is intended to act as a catalyst rather than the primary source of investment. The objective is to use state spending, subsidies, and financial guarantees to encourage substantially larger commitments from private companies.

This reflects a growing belief among policymakers that government support can help reduce investment risks in sectors where returns may take years to materialize but where strategic benefits are considered essential. The model has already proven effective in attracting major technology investments into Japan’s semiconductor sector. If successful, the strategy could help channel capital into industries that might otherwise struggle to secure sufficient long-term financing.

According to the report, the government is also considering establishing a multi-year budget framework to provide predictable funding for strategic projects. Such a framework would mark an important departure from annual budget cycles, which often create uncertainty for large-scale infrastructure and technology investments.

Long-term funding visibility is especially important in sectors such as AI, semiconductor fabrication, and space exploration, where projects frequently require investment commitments stretching over a decade or more.

The government is reportedly examining the use of bridging bonds to support some of these initiatives. Bridging bonds are designed to meet temporary financing needs while being linked to specific mechanisms for eventual repayment. For Tokyo, this approach could provide flexibility to increase investment without appearing to abandon fiscal discipline.

Balancing Growth Ambitions and Fiscal Reality

Japan already carries the highest public debt burden among major advanced economies, with debt exceeding 250% of gross domestic product. As a result, any substantial increase in government spending inevitably raises questions about fiscal sustainability.

The use of bridging bonds suggests policymakers are attempting to reconcile two competing priorities:

• First, the need to invest aggressively in future growth sectors.
• Second, the need to reassure investors that Japan remains committed to responsible fiscal management.

That balancing act has become even more important following the recent shift by the Bank of Japan toward monetary policy normalization. Rising interest rates could gradually increase the government’s borrowing costs after years of ultra-loose monetary conditions.

The timing of the initiative is closely linked to the global AI boom. Governments and corporations are racing to secure access to advanced computing infrastructure, semiconductor capacity, and AI talent.

The United States currently dominates much of the frontier AI ecosystem, while China is investing heavily to reduce technological dependence on foreign suppliers.

Japan’s strategy suggests policymakers see an opportunity to leverage the country’s strengths in manufacturing, robotics, precision engineering, and materials science to carve out a larger role in the AI value chain. Rather than competing directly with U.S. AI model developers, Japan could focus on supplying critical technologies, components, and infrastructure that underpin the global AI economy.