certain statutory components of the United States export control and regulatory system are overly cumbersome for industries in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, delaying and complicating the United States from achieving national security objectives at the speed of relevance. (18) Australia and the United Kingdom have legal, regulatory, and technology control regimes that are sufficiently comparable to those of the United States. (19) United States technology controls and export licensing decisions must balance the relatively low risk of compromise that exists across all three AUKUS partners regulatory regimes against the requirements to respond at the speed of relevance to the rapid military advances made by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. (20) In order to implement the AUKUS agreement and realize the value of increased cooperation between the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, the United States must ensure cooperation is fostered, not inhibited, by the United States regulatory system. (21) The United States export control system, encompassing both the International Traffic and Arms Regulations and the Export Administration Regulations, is largely based on a bilateral government-to-government relationship, is not optimized for a trilateral arrangement, and must reflect the new era of allied partnership continuing evolution of United States export control regulation. (22) The Department of State, in concert with the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, and other relevant United States agencies, should clearly communicate to our AUKUS partners any United States requirements to address matters related to the technology security and export control measures of Australia and the United Kingdom. (23) Further, the Department of State, in concert with the Department of Defense, the Department of Commerce, and other relevant United States agencies, should work to reduce barriers to defense innovation, cooperation, trade, production, and sustainment with the