THE HIGHER LENS : 19
Public-Private Engagement in National Security: Careers and Cooperation
This week, I am joined by Dr Hugo Rosemont, Director of Government Affairs at BMNT Ltd, Senior Associate Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, and Visiting Senior Research Fellow with the Department of War Studies at King’s College, London. Hugo’s career spans academia, government, industry, and think tanks, with a particular focus on defence, national security, and the evolving relationship between the public and private sectors. In this conversation, Hugo reflects on the recent evolution of public-private cooperation across UK defence and national security and offers insights for early career leaders on the breadth of opportunity across these sectors. It was a pleasure to speak with Hugo about his career journey and to explore the growing importance of collaboration between government, industry, and academia in shaping the future of national security.
Your professional trajectory has spanned academia, government, industry and think tanks – how did this come about, and how do these spheres intersect in practice?
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss these issues with you, Vlera, and for the opening question. In short, I feel fortunate to have been engaged in the sector from these very different perches. And my response arises from both my academic interest and professional focus on how to facilitate effective private sector contributions in these areas of government. Having been engaged in this question for over 25 years, I’ve learnt that each of these stakeholder sets have critical roles to play to ensure that the private sector in its various forms can make meaningful, proportionate, and effective contributions to national security. The good news is that, today, there is much more dialogue and collaboration between them to find the best ways to help make this happen. But, at the same time, it is an extremely diverse and disaggregated sector, with no one ‘lever’ or ‘silver bullet’ available to busy policymakers that might easily compel people to cooperate. The dialogue is therefore often much less structured, coordinated or formalised than people might think. But this doesn’t mean we can’t achieve success across these spheres. In my experience, the best sort of collaboration we’ve seen between them rests on listening and mutual understanding, combined with an alignment of priorities and incentives. This is why it is so important that our sector can continue to attract people with an instinct for cooperation and the greater good. Particularly now - in the troubling geopolitical context - it needs all the help it can get.
How do you think the role of public–private cooperation in UK national security and resilience has evolved over time?
My personal engagement in the UK security and counter-terrorism sector started in earnest following the terrorist attacks in the United States in September 2001. Like so many others of my generation, and following the initial horror, I wanted to try to understand why and how such a thing could happen, and become engaged in tackling the problem. For me, this meant the pursuit of postgraduate study: ultimately culminating in my doctorate on the origins, character and consequences of the private sector’s involvement in this area, which examined whether something resembling a ‘security-industrial complex’ had arisen. To answer your question, I’ve seen public-private security cooperation evolve from a narrow focus in counter-terrorism in the early 2000s to a much broader – should I say ‘higher’ –Lens. Today, I argue that there is not a single area of national security policy – think cyber security, defence, organised crime, supply chain security, emergency preparedness, and the list goes on – within which governments do not depend deeply upon the private sector for the protection of national security and resilience. And how we see the ‘private sector’ has also broadened significantly; whereas in the Cold War era the focus was on the generation of military capabilities by the traditional defence industrial base, Governments now need a much wider set of relationships with – among many other categories – privately operators of critical infrastructure to ensure the resilience of national assets, social media companies to ensure online safety, the communications industry for the protection of subsea cables, and the finance industry to enable funding into defence. The categories of private sector companies that are engaged in national security has therefore evolved considerably. And for me, having looked across these subsectors, I find that the most successful models of public-private cooperation are found where there is a very open and honest dialogue between government and industry.
Given your experiences, how would you characterise the role of government affairs in defence and national security, particularly at a moment of rapid technological and geopolitical change?
As a practitioner in the field, I hope you will forgive me for responding that of course mine is a crucial profession. But seriously, I see growing demand for the services that government affairs practitioners can provide in such a period of intense change. The re-emergence of state competition is re-joined to the wider threat picture that never subsided: terrorism, organised crime and climate change all put pressure on the resilience of societies. And, given the plurality of threats, the state's capacity to ensure national resilience is under constant strain - especially given the pressure on public spending levels. This is why Governments are now seeking deeper dialogue with a wider variety of private companies on security and resilience. But the cooperation they want doesn’t happen on its own; this has resulted in the demand for those who can ‘translate’ respective priorities, and that creates opportunity amidst the fluidity. In short, those who can understand and help government and industry to navigate these radically changing dynamics will be well placed to consider practicing government affairs. Ultimately, we are seeking, as a community, to translate respective priorities between the public and private sectors, to mitigate the critical security risks weve discussed. So, this is not just a ‘nice to have’. We need to urgently build new bridges to enable cooperation between the government and the private sector; to date, government machinery has taken too long to evolve. If we look at Ukraine, the brave people standing up to Russian aggression are showing us - albeit in a very difficult situation - a new kind of full-bloodied engagement with the private sector across multiple dimensions. They are pointing the way to the types of industrial engagement that countries including the UK are going to need across defence and security.
What advice would you offer to early career professionals interested in security and defence policy and government affairs, and what skills or experiences matter the most?
That is a great question. My work at King’s College, London, is focused on helping students with this very question. For me, a key skill for those committed to and wanting to pursue the enablement of public-private security cooperation is to hone one’s inquisitiveness and focus on constant learning. This includes reading widely on developments in the sector, but also in respect to engaging in the impact of ongoing technological transformation at both societal and personal levels. This is, as an aside, not about beating ourselves up when we are not ‘on top’ of understanding the latest technologies – I’ve learnt from my work in big tech that you can never be fully on top of it, and risk harming yourself trying to do so. However, it is important to try to maintain a degree of fluency, especially in government affairs.
Particularly with the advent of modern technology - including regarding its application to defence and national security - professionals in our field need to roll up their sleeves as much as anyone else in moving beyond the buzzwords. For those who are interested in pursuing a career in industry - or docking with industry - in defence and national security, I also think that the ability to build and engage with a wide network of contacts effectively is a key skill. It remains a ‘people business’, after all, and a core aspect of defence and security is maintaining trust across a wide set of stakeholders. To do that, we need to develop our confidence and abilities to approach and engage with individuals, including those with more experience or operating at more senior levels. This is not just about booking a ticket to a conference and hoping to bump into someone important; it is preparing oneself for entering that conference with the outcomes set on what to achieve from it. And I’m confident that, when one does plan one’s approach to engagement in this focused way - and with a little courage - the conversations and connections will be more forthcoming, valuable and enjoyable than one ever expected. Exactly as today’s conversation with the Higher Lens has been.
That’s the perfect note to end on today. Hugo, thank you for such a thoughtful and generous conversation. Ive really enjoyed it, and I know our readers will too.
Thats totally my pleasure, Vlera. Thank you for the invitation.